MERGA

2026 Conference Proceedings

  • Home
  • >
  • 2026 Conference Proceedings

2026 Conference Proceedings

2026 Full Conference Proceedings

MERGA48 – Beyond Boundaries: Strengthening Futures in Mathematics Education

6 – 10 July 2026, Parramatta NSW, Australia

Editors: Nathan Berger, Matt Thompson, John Ley and Cristi Wilsmore 

CLEMENTS-FOYSTER LECTURE

Affect in Mathematics Education: Blurring the Boundaries – Kim Beswick

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Fostering Students’ Mathematical Understanding through Problem-Posing-Based Learning (P-PBL) – Jinfa Cai

Advocacy and Subversion: Using the Past to Think About Mathematics in the Future – Tamsin Meaney

RESEARCH PAPERS

Defining Mathematical Thinking for Classroom Practice – Kelli Anson, Margaret Marshman, & Elizabeth Wheeley

The Planning and Implementation of AI-Generated Rich Tasks in Primary Mathematics Classrooms – Catherine Attard & Caitlin Cole

Using Generative AI To Develop Maths Tasks With Focus On Social Justice Perspectives – Sabahat Awan, Tracey Muir, Chrissy Monteleone, & Kimberley Wilson

Research Participation as a Space for Teachers’ Reflection and Re-evaluation of Student Success – Rebecca Burtenshaw

A Preliminary Framework for the Effective Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) by Mathematics Teachers – Scott Cameron & Carmel Mesiti

The Role of Gesture in Determining Van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thinking of Young Children – Katherin Cartwright & Jennifer Way

Australian Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Conceptions of Mathematical Challenging Tasks – Michelle Cheung, Bronwyn Reid O’Connor, & Ben Zunica

Noticing Affordances of Tasks for Use with Low-Progress Learners in Mathematics: The Case of Mr Faizad – Ban Heng Choy, Kenneth Yu Heng Kwan, & Joseph B.W Yeo

Risks and Opportunities of Online Platforms for Learning Mathematics – Lisa Darragh & Melina Amos

Parental Involvement in Mathematics Learning in Multicultural School Communities in Australia – Minoli Dediwalage

Advice for Aspiring School Mathematics Leaders – Kerryn Driscoll & Jill Cheeseman

Developing Mathematics Registers in Australian Indigenous Languages: Classification and Comparison – Cris Edmonds-Wathen, Sasha Wilmoth, James Bednall, & Kate Charlwood

Integration of Education for Sustainable Development in Mathematics Education: A Scoping Review – Elizar Elizar, Dwi Fadhiliani, & Erni Maidiyah

Developing and Piloting a Responsive Mathematics Teaching Observation Scale (RMTOS) – Zara Ersozlu

Seven Barriers (Perceived or Real) to Inclusive Secondary Mathematics – Rhonda Faragher, Kim Beswick, Monica Cuskelly, & Jan Lloyd

Exploring Mathematical Justifications in Collaborative Problem Solving of a Heterogeneous Group – Namirah Fatmanissa

An Australian-Ghanaian Comparison of STEM Education Contexts: Supporting STEM Reasoning – Kym Fry, Bridget Amo-Darko, & Lyn D. English

Assessment Contexts: Oral vs Written Performance in Mathematics Education – Sima Hajilarova & Daya Weerasinghe

Challenging One-Size-Fits-All Contexts: Primary Teachers Experiencing Culturally Responsive Mathematics Teaching as Learners – Faradillah Haryani

Mathematical Creativity Among (Preservice) Teachers: An Assessment Approach – Vesife Hatisaru, Steven Richardson, & Alan McCarthy

Maths Self-Concept Change in Makerspaces – Kristen Hebden, Emily Cook, & Victoria Millar

Teaching Mathematical Proof in the Age of Generative AI: Toward AI-Supported Proof Inquiry – Weng Kin Ho

From Beliefs to Practice: Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Conceptions and the Teaching of Mathematical Proof in Singapore Classrooms – Weng Kin Ho, Berinderjeet Kaur, & Navinesh Thanabalasingam

Teachers’ Awareness of Students’ Difficulties with Algebra Word Problems – Osman Kasimu, Carol Murphy, & Vesife Hatisaru

Initial Teacher Education and Out-of-Field Teaching: Problem or Solution? – Osman Kasimu, Emily Ross, Merrilyn Goos, Greg Oates, Linda Hobbs, Susan Caldis, Connie Cirkony, Seamus Delaney, Janet Dutton, Trevor McCandless, Karen Shelley

Selling Success: A Critical Examination of Mathematics Tutoring Advertisements in Australia – Zehao Li, Bronwyn Reid O’Connor, & Ben Zunica

Teaching Experience and Teacher Competence for Multiplicative Thinking in the Early Years – Mayamiko Malola & Max Stephens

Primary Teacher Confidence as a Mediating Factor in Content-Specific Mathematics Resource Selection – Christos Markopoulos & Karen Skilling

A Mathematical Resilience Intervention for Upper Primary Students: A Design to Address Mathematics Anxiety – Ashley McAvoy, Eibhlish O’Hara, & Paula Mildenhall

Tick or Fix: Enacting Daily Reviews in Primary Mathematics Classrooms and Implications for Inclusive Teaching – Tracey Muir & Sharyn Livy

Finding Common Ground: Perspectives on Spatial Reasoning and Patterning in Mathematics Education – Joanne Mulligan, Astrid Junker, Ilyse Resnick, Kevin Larkin, & Tom Lowrie

Pedagogic Identity and Maths Talk in the Early Years: A Study of Two Teachers – Carol Murphy, Tracey Muir, & Damon Thomas

Primary and Secondary Teacher Confidence in Teaching Mathematics Concepts – Kristy Osborne & Chrissy Monteleone

Incremental Professional Development in Algebra: Considering Teachers’ Opinions on Instructional Nudges – Samuel Otten, Amber G. Candela, & Zandra de Araujo

Beyond Boundaries: How Mathematics Education Research Frames Generative AI Use Through ZPA–ZFM – Sitti Maesuri Patahuddin, Siti Rokhmah, Agustin Ernawati, & Susilahudin Putrawangsa

From Text Direction to the Number Line: How Cultural Reading Systems and Education Shape Numerical-Spatial Mapping – Thi Hong Dung Phan, Rhonda Faragher, & Robyn Gillies

From Uncertainty to Enacted Agency: A Mother’s Developing Agency in Supporting Mathematics Learning at Home – Huayu Vicky Punter, Chrystal Whiteford, & Grace Sarra

Making Multiplication Structure Visible: Spatial Artefacts, Instrumental Genesis, and Emerging Distributive Reasoning – Susilahudin Putrawangsa, Sitti Maesuri Patahuddin, & Tom Lowrie

Pre-Service Teachers’ Conceptual Confidence in Mathematics and Science: Initial Tool Development – Kate Quane, Rosalie Miller, Sarah Wickham, Timna Garnett, Shaileigh Rowtcliff, Leanne Larkin, & Helen Booth

Capturing the use of Key Word Sign in Early Childhood Mathematics – Kate Quane, Belinda Trewartha, Lorraine Gaunt, Elaine Stigwood, & Zoe Wadsworth

Seeing the Invisible: Exploring the Use of Spatial Reasoning in Mathematics Problem Solving Beyond Geometry at the Secondary School Level – Fakhrur Razi & Nafisah Nafisah

Design Principles of Mathematics Placements that Support Beginning Teachers to Flourish – Bronwyn Reid O’Connor & Ben Zunica

Professional Noticing Journal for Evidence-Linked Decisions and Teacher Learning – Erlina Ronda & Mary Grace Macacua

Teachers’ Praxis in Mediating Student Understanding Using Authentic Contexts – Justine Sakurai & Max Stephens

Beyond Methodological Boundaries Examining Mathematics Leadership: The Potential of Developmental Work Research – Matt Sexton & Eamon Light

Nudging Pathways: The Role of Teacher Recommendations as Strategic Interventions in Senior Mathematics and STEM Extension Choices – Hazel Tan & Janelle Hill

An Ontological and Epistemological Interrogation of Explicit Teaching in Mathematics – Steve Thornton

Halving and Doubling in Multi-Digit Multiplication: How Students’ Spatial Structuring of Arrays Supports Structural Understanding – Kristen Tripet

Mathematics Education as Mathematical and Educational – Jana Višňovská & José Luis Cortina

Investigating Primary Students’ Images of a Whole in Fractions – Kamirsyah Wahyu

Exploring Price Conceptions as Part of Financial Numeracy – Dinah-Marie Wiedenhöfer

Mathematical Bibliotherapy for Pre-service Teachers: A Case Study – Caroline Yoon, Alice Smith, & Lisa Darragh

Integrating Appreciative Education and Funds of Knowledge in Mathematics Classrooms – Shuqiong Zhao, Kerri Spooner, & Jyoti Jhagroo

Changing Conditions to Enable Student Problem Posing: A Practice Architectures Analysis – Kristin Zorn

ROUND TABLES

‘Success’ as Mathematics Education Researchers: A Community Conversation – Rebecca Burtenshaw

Mathematics Teacher Education for a Challenging Future: Continuing the Conversation – Ban Heng Choy & Sze Looi Chin

Publishing in International Mathematics Education Journals – Vince Geiger, Hans-Stefan Siller, & Jana Višňovská

Identity and Mathematics Education – Peter Grootenboer

Mapping the Ecosystem of Out-of-Field Teaching in Mathematics – Emily Ross, Merrilyn Goos, Greg Oates, & Osman Kasimu

Integrating Data Science, Computational Thinking, and AI into Mathematics Education: An Australian Challenge – Justine Sakurai, Max Stephens, Rachael Whitney-Smith, Merrilyn Goos, Elena Prieto-Rodriguez, & Chris De Haer

Positioning, Purposes, and Policy: Examining the Purposes of Middle Leading of Mathematics in Primary Schools – Matt Sexton, Kerryn Driscoll, Kate Copping, & Ann Downton

Number as Quantity in the Australian Curriculum – Jana Višňovská & José Luis Cortina

From Instructor to Facilitator of Learning: Shifting the Practices of Secondary Mathematics Teachers – Rachael Whitney-Smith

SPECIAL WORKING GROUPS

Effective Pedagogies in Mathematics Education: Implications for Initial Teacher Education – Rosalie Miller, Jill Fielding, & Bridgeen Pritchard

Spotlight on Out-of-Field Teaching in Mathematics: Fast-Paced Research Highlights to Build Community Connections – Emily Ross, Kathryn Holmes, Carly Sawatzki, & Greg Oates

SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Using Eye-Tracking Software to Examine the Relation Between Spatial Reasoning and Mathematical Problem-Solving Behaviour – Jonathan Adams, Fadia Younes, & Ilyse Resnick

Pre-service Teacher Experience Framing Generative Artificial Intelligence as a Thought Partner in Learning Mathematics – Zareen G. Aga, Tracey Muir, Kimberley Wilson, & Paul Hernandez Martinez

Artificial Intelligence in Secondary Mathematics Classrooms: Insights from a Scoping Review – Doha Al Sabbagh, Catherine Attard, & Kathryn Holmes

Building Adaptive Expertise by Making Expert Assessment for Learning in Mathematics Visible – Catherine Challen, Julie Arnold, & Jill Willis

Investigating Teacher Noticing in Technology-Enhanced Mathematics Classrooms – Kexin Chen

Insights into Very Young Children’s Mathematical Thinking from Psychological Research – Audrey Cooke

MERGA Reports of Primary Mathematics Middle Leadership Practices: A Scoping Review – Kate Copping, Kerryn Driscoll, Matt Sexton, & Ann Downton

Can Young Children Divide Using Ideas of Rate? – Ann Downton & Jill Cheeseman

Towards Levels of Reading Mathematical Expressions to Comprehend the Underlying Phenomenon – Satoshi Enomoto & Satoshi Kaneko

Development of Teacher and Student Perception Surveys of Mathematical Resilience – Vanessa Gorman, Amie Albrecht, Lisa O’Keeffe, & Florence Gabriel

Beyond Mathematical Thinking: Teachers’ Noticing of Engagement and Dispositions in Primary Mathematics – Anita Green

Rationales Behind Problem-Solving Implementation: Perspectives From Primary Mathematics Teachers – Donna Guise & Christine Johnston

Micro-Credentials as a Response to Out-of-Field Mathematics Teaching: Emerging Evidence – Janelle Hill

Emotions as Signals: A Methodological Framework Combining Achievement Emotion Theory and Mathematical Wellbeing – Julia L. Hill, Tracey Muir, Jodie Hunter, Sharyn Livy, Matt Sexton, & Donna King

Out-of-Field Teachers: Who is Teaching Senior Secondary Mathematics in New Zealand? – Naomi Ingram, Lisa Darragh, Jodie Hunter, & Jared Carpendale

Learners’ Negotiation on Mathematical Task Choices – Jasneet Kaur

How Prospective Mathematics Teachers Elicit, Explore, & Apply Classification Models in Unplugged Image Classification Tasks – Takashi Kawakami & Takashi Ishijima

Mathematical Affective Factors Experienced by Year 7 Students During Transition to Secondary School – Nicola Kovacs

Spatial Training Improves Mathematics Performance Independent of Mathematics Anxiety in Early Adolescence – Nicola Kovacs & Ilyse Resnick

Design Principles for Teacher Discourse: Developing Adaptive Reasoning in Mathematics Classrooms – Mary Grace Macacua & Erlina Ronda

Do Paradigms Matter in Mathematics Education Research? – Katie Makar

Analysis of Unitizing and Norming Abilities in the Process of Reasoning Up and Down in Fraction Learning in Year 6 – Yuri Masutani, Taketo Shimomura, & Yosuke Yahagi

Engaging Pre-Service Teachers in Asynchronous Learning: Evidence from a Systematic Review – Carmel Mesiti, Scott Cameron, Amanda Reed, Kate Copping, Cristina Guarrella, Kristen Hebden, & Emma Stevenson

Curiosity as Circuit Breaker: Deconstructing Teacher Educator Deficit Perspectives of Pre-Service Teacher Resistance – Rosalie Miller & Julie Clark

From Outcomes to Opportunities: Broadening the Conception of School Data for Reflective Mathematics Teaching – Sadaf Mirza

Emerging Dimensions in Early Childhood Mathematics Education Research: Perspectives from the 15th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-15) – Joanne Mulligan, Camilla Björklund, Raimundo Olfos, Douglas H. Clements, & Julie Sarama

Qualitative Changes in Primary Pupils’ Geometric Reasoning Through Engaging with Diagrams in Generative Mode of Interaction – Shogo Obayashi, Taro Fujita, & Hidenori Kobayashi

Can Research on Conspiracy Theory Inoculation Motivate Mathematics Instruction? – Samuel Otten

Reframing Reluctance as a Turning Point for Students’ Critical Mathematical Thinking – Agnita Siska Pramasdyahsari, Vince Geiger, Mirjam Schmid, Duncan Cook, Kim Beswick, Merrilyn Goos, Gabriele Kaiser, Thorsten Scheiner, & Yoriko Kikkawa

An Investigation on the Impact of Screen Multi-Tasking on Secondary Students Behaviour and Wellbeing in Mathematics in NSW Secondary Schools – Anita Santillana, Benjamin Zunica, & Bronwyn Reid-O’Connor

Consensus-Building in Mathematics Classroom Talk: A Speech-Act Perspective – Taketo Shimomura, Yuri Masutani, Asuka Yamada, & Shohei Shimomura

Exploring the Mathematics Experiences of Students with Down Syndrome – Matt Thompson, Kathryn Holmes, & Catherine Attard

Implementing Interactive Oral Examinations in Tertiary Mathematics Classes – Hayden Tronnolone

What Students Tell Us: Preferences for Learning Trigonometry Through Pen-and-Paper and Online Practice – Chris Wright

Developing Critical, Adaptive, and Inventive Thinking through Mathematics: A GameBased Approach – Shijia Yang

A Comparative Analysis of Mathematics Textbooks between the 2022 South Korean Curriculum and the Australian Curriculum v9.0: Focusing on the Introduction to Functions in Secondary – Dae-hun Yoon

The Beginnings of MERGA

Preamble to the Annual Clements/Foyster Lecture

In the middle of 1976 John Foyster, who was then based at the Australian Council for
Educational Research (ACER), came to see me at Monash University, where I was in charge of the Mathematics Education program. John talked about how the Australian Science Education Research Association (ASERA) had recently been established, with Professor Richard Tisher (then of Monash University) as the prime mover. John wondered whether the time was ripe for a similar national group interested in mathematics education research to be established, and asked whether he and I might take steps to establish such a group.

My immediate reaction was yes, we should do it. Then came the doubts and reservations. How would the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (AATM) react to such an initiative? After all, AAMT already had a “Research Committee.” In any case, would there be enough mathematics educators in Australia, interested in such a group to make it a viable proposition? Who would provide the funds likely to be needed for the establishment of such a group?

It was John’s and my opinion that the AAMT Research Committee had not reached out to embrace most of the people lecturing in mathematics education in Australia at teachers colleges or in universities at the time. Intuitively, I thought Australia needed a group like the
one John was proposing. My intuition told me that AAMT was not the organisation to move towards the establishment of such a group.

John assured me that he would put up any funds needed to get the group going (and, hopefully, any group that was established would be able to pay him back within a few years). Hence we decided to proceed with the idea of establishing the group and to strike while the iron was hot, so to speak, by conducting a national conference at Monash University in the middle of 1977. I came up with the name “Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia” which John liked because of the acronym MERGA, which suggested a “merging together.” We sent out notices of our intention to form MERGA late in 1976. Neither of us knew many of the people who might be interested in joining such a group, so the notices were addressed to the “Mathematics Lecturers at…”

Soon after we had decided to go ahead, I heard of the existence of a group, based in New South Wales, called the Mathematics Education Lecturers’ Association (MELA). John and I talked about whether MERGA and MELA might become one from the outset, but we decided that the aims of MELA seemed to be sufficiently different from those that we envisaged for MERGA, focused far more on research than lecturing, that we should proceed with the MERGA idea.

And so it came to be that in May 1977, the first of what was to become the annual conference of MERGA took place. About 100 people attended, with papers frenetically being read from 9 am to about 10 pm, for three days, in a Rotunda Theatre at Monash University. Professor Richard Tisher was present at the start of the Conference, and talked of his experiences in establishing ASERA. Frank Lester, of Indiana University, was among those present. In the event, two volumes of papers read at the Conference were produced (the first volume being available on the first day of the Conference, and the second several months later).

At a post-Conference meeting it was decided that, yes, MERGA should be formed, that the second meeting would be at Macquarie University in May 1978, and that an annual conferences should be held each year at a different academic institution. At that second conference it was decided by those present that MERGA should continue and a constitution and election of offices would be decided on at the third conference to be held at the then Brisbane College of Education. And so MERGA was born. 

Ken Clements 

Short Communications, Round Tables and Special Working Groups

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a short communication, round table or special working group to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the abstracts which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted once the paper is accepted for the conference

Submissions not exceeding one page are required for short communications, round tables and special working groups. The submissions must be prepared using the conference template, and can include essential references. They will be reviewed by the Editorial Team and, if accepted, will be published in the conference proceedings as one-page abstracts (not as papers). Presenters are invited to prepare a paper for distribution at the conference, but these papers will not be included in the proceedings.

Short communications are suitable for reports on research in mathematics education that do not fully meet the requirements for published papers. These might include works in preliminary stages, reports of pilot projects, initial reviews of literature, ideas or suggestions for future study, and briefer discussions of particular issues. Short communications allow new researchers to obtain feedback on projects in a constructive and supportive environment, and foster the building of links between researchers with similar interests.

Short communications are presented by author(s) only, allocated half of the time for research reports (in past, this was 20 minutes). At least 5 minutes is to be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Round tables are suitable for presenters seeking involved interaction with the audience in relation to their research or topic of interest in mathematics education, and for those sharing their insights and advice with the early career colleagues. These might include discussion of an emerging topic, co-analysis of provided student work, solving a mathematical task, or discussing the demands and benefits of reviewing for high quality journals. Round tables allow finding peers with similar research interests, exploration of new research avenues, and building the capacity of MERGA community.

Round tables are led by author(s) only, allocated the same time as research reports (in past, this was 40 minutes). The abstracts should make clear the interactive element of the proposed activity, with no more than 15 min of the session time in a presentation mode.

Special working groups are specialised Round Tables offered by the SWG teams to report on their progress, seek future directions, and new collaborators. The session organisers determine how to use the allocated 40 minutes and outline this in their 1-page description.

Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award (BSPIA) recognises high-quality mathematics education that produces insights for the teaching profession and/or student learning.

The award consists of $500 and a plaque to be presented at the Conference.

Nomination process 

There are two ways a paper can be nominated for the BSPIA:

  • Self-nomination: When you submit your conference paper, check the box that asks if you would like to apply for the BSPIA.
  • Nomination via peer-review: Anyone who submits a Conference paper for peer-review will be considered for nomination by the reviewers. 

Single and co-authored papers are eligible for consideration.

When you write your paper, please ensure that you observe all general paper submission requirements including the maximum page length.

Judging process

Submissions must be deemed eligible for publication in the Conference proceedings by the initial reviewing panel. Submissions accepted for presentation only will be excluded from consideration.

The judging panel will consist of two MERGA members and two AAMT nominees and will be chaired by the VP Development.

The judging criteria are:

  • Identification of a persistent and significant research problem
  • Synthesis of recent research literature and relevant policy initiatives
  • Robust methodology producing valid, reliable findings
  • Insightful discussion of practical implications for the teaching profession and/or student learning
  • Clear, succinct style of academic writing

Winners are notified four weeks prior to the Conference and are invited to present a keynote at the annual conference.

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award page on this website provides further information, including the history of the award and recent winners.  

Research Papers

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research paper to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted once the paper is accepted for the conference

Research papers can take two major forms: 

1. Reports of empirical investigations 

When empirical investigations are reported (such as in an experimental intervention, confirmatory study, or action research, etc.), the paper should also include

  • a statement of rationale for methodologies used in collecting and analysing data;
  • a critical discussion of data findings in the light of the research literature; and
  • in the literature review, prior work in the area should be acknowledged and an explanation of how the work reported in the paper builds on that earlier work should be included.

2. Reports that are not based on empirical research including:

  • a theoretical discussion;
  • a position paper;
  • a report of scholarly enquiry in progress;
  • a literature review, a meta-study;
  • an account of a new initiative;
  • a reflective critique of practice; or
  • any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms.

When the work is a theoretical discussion, a position paper, a report of scholarly inquiry in progress, a review of literature, a theoretical study, a meta-study, an account of a new initiative, a reflective critique of practice or any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms, the material presented must be discussed critically, and alternative points of view relating to themes presented should be appropriately argued.
It is expected that presenting authors will have 40 minutes to present their work at the conference. At least 10 minutes must be allowed to field questions and comments from the audience.

Structure of research papers – All papers for publication in the conference proceedings should contain the following:

  • a statement of the problem/issue and a discussion of its significance;
  • a critical analysis of the research literature as it relates to the topic of the paper; and
  • conclusions and implications for mathematics education derived from the study.

All papers must respect MERGA’s ethical guidelines relating to research work. Papers should not be more than the set length. In addition, papers must be: readable; free of grammatical, spelling and typographical errors; and adhere strictly to style requirements advertised by the conference proceedings Editorial Team.

Originality – Only research papers that are substantially different from work that has been published previously will be considered for publication in the conference proceedings and/or presentation at the conference.

Reviewing of research papers – Research papers will be blind reviewed by a panel of peers approved by the conference committee. The main purpose of the refereeing process is to contribute to the growth and development of quality practice in mathematics education research. Thus reviewers are asked to assist authors by providing helpful feedback and to comment on the suitability of papers for presentation at the conference. Accordingly, it will not be assumed that published papers presented at the conference will be as polished as articles in scholarly journals. Referees will be asked to assess papers being reviewed against the accepted norms for scholarly works presented at MERGA conferences, as set out above.

Each conference proceedings’ Editorial Team will exercise discretion over the reviewing process. Reviewers’ comments will be returned to the authors. Authors whose papers are not accepted for publication may be invited by the editorial panel to present their paper at the conference as a Short Communication, with a 1-page abstract (which they will be invited to provide) being published in the proceedings. Papers may be rejected outright, with no opportunity for presentation at the conference in an alternative form.

Research Symposia

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research symposium to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted once the paper is accepted for the conference

Presentation of groups of published papers related by theme in the form of a research symposium is encouraged. The symposium forum will be particularly suitable for presentations relating to a single large project or presentations that explore topical themes from different and/or related perspectives. Special Interest Groups [SIGs] are encouraged to consider the symposium option as a means for sharing and discussing current research.

A symposium should consist of no more than four presentations of about 15 minutes duration each. The written papers should be half the length of research papers as described for research papers. Both research report types – empirical or non-empirical – are acceptable as published symposium papers.

A brief overview of the symposium (limit one page), including a symposium title, an introduction to the theme/project, and a short introduction to each of the 3-4 contributions, must be submitted with the set of short papers. Please list the symposium convenors as the authors on the first page, and name the paper authors in the text description.

The symposium proposer will also nominate a person to chair the symposium, and a discussant can also be named if desired. This information should accompany the collection of papers submitted for review.

The set of symposium papers (and the overview) will be blind reviewed by a review panel. The main purpose of the reviews is the same as for published papers, and the same criteria are used. The reviewers will be asked to consider the cohesiveness of the set of symposium papers. They will indicate whether the symposium as a whole, and each paper within it, should be “accepted”, “rejected” or if it “requires revision”. If it is deemed that one, some or all of the papers are in need of revision, the reviewers will outline which papers need to be revised and provide suggestions for the required changes. When the revisions are made, the symposium papers will be re-submitted and the set of papers will be sent to the same review panel for further consideration. As with research papers, the final decision about which symposium papers will be published is at the discretion of the Editorial Team.

The date for submission of the collection of symposium papers is the same as for Early Bird papers. This date has been set for the benefit of the group of authors of symposia papers. Should the symposium papers require revision, the authors will have the time to make the corrections and resubmit the set of symposium papers to be re-reviewed by the original reviewers.

Presentation of symposia: Symposia are presented by author(s) only, usually within a 90 min block. At least 10 minutes must be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Early Career Research Award

In order to encourage new researchers in mathematics education, MERGA sponsors an award to an author in the early part of her/his career. The award, for excellence in writing and presenting a piece of mathematics education research, consists of a plaque and a prize of $500 and is presented at the annual conference. 

Applying for the award

Entry for the Early Career Research Award is by submission of a written paper for presentation at the conference through the Early Bird process. Conditions of eligibility, information about the judging process, and the criteria judges will observe are indicated below. If you are applying for the Early Career Research Award, please ensure that when you upload your paper on the conference website, you also send an email to the Conference Secretariat indicating that you are an entrant for the Early Career Research Award. Note that at some MERGA conferences there is also a form to complete or a box to tick on the registration form, so check the conference website carefully. Please note that co-authored papers ARE NOT eligible for entry into the Early Career Research Award, nor are Round Table or Symposium papers.

Rules and eligibility for the Early Career Award

The Early Career Research Award page on this website provides further information about this award, including a list of recent winners.

Early Bird Review Process

The Early Bird review process is a form of mentoring, principally for new researchers. However, anyone is eligible to make use of it. Research papers submitted through the Early Bird process must be received by the Early Bird due date (i.e., the closing date in January). They must meet the requirements as set out for MERGA Research Papers. Early Bird papers should be uploaded following a link on the conference website. Authors will be asked to create a login into Oxford Abstracts (our conference management system) and submit the blinded file (anonymised) in the correct template for review.

Early Bird papers undergo a double-blind MERGA reviewing process. There are three possible outcomes of the review, and actions the authors need to follow.

  1. When the paper is accepted (for presentation at the conference and publication in the proceedings), the authors will be asked to provide their full unblinded manuscript and publication agreement.
  2. When small revisions are required, the revised papers will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March. The changes are considered by the editors, and the papers are not usually sent out for review again. The editors decide whether the paper is accepted for publication as well as presentation at the conference.
  3. When more major revisions are required, the reviewers will provide the author/s with feedback on how to how to strengthen the paper. The paper will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March, and it will be sent out for a new double-blind review.

Authors are notified of the outcome as soon as possible (usually within a few weeks, and in time for resubmission). Letters are sent to authors to indicate (a) accepted for publication, (b) small revisions required, (c) or major rewriting required.