MERGA

Location

Final Conference Proceedings
Conference Program - Overview

Conference Committee Members

Conference Co-chairs

Professor Peter Grootenboer

Griffith Institute for Educational Research

Griffith University

Doctor Kym Fry

Griffith Institute for Educational Research

Griffith University

Conference Co-Chairs

Dr Kym Fry, Griffith University

Professor Peter Grootenboer, Griffith University

 

Proceeding Editors

Dr Jana Visnovska, The University of Queensland

Dr Emily Ross, The University of Queensland

Dr Seyum Getenet, University of Southern Queensland

 

Conference Program

Professor Kevin Larkin, Griffith University

Associate Professor Jodie Miller, The University of Queensland

 

Treasurer

Dr Margaret Marshman, University of Sunshine Coast

Members

Dr Saidat Adeniji, University of Southern Queensland

Dr Anne Bennison, University of Sunshine Coast

Rebecca Burtenshaw, University of Sunshine Coast

Gabi Cooper, Griffith University

Professor Merrilyn Goos, University of Sunshine Coast

Professor Mellony Graven, Rhodes University

Alexandra Laird, Griffith University

Paulina Sliedrecht, Queensland Association of Mathematics Teachers

Kristin Zorn, Griffith University

Tracey Reader, Griffith University

MERGA46 Keynote Speakers

Professor Nathalie Sinclair

Simon Fraser University

Towards embodies validity in mathematics education research

As theories of embodiment become more prevalent in mathematics education research, researchers are attending to many aspects of student and teacher interactions including body movements, affect and sensory experiences. These are not always adequately captured by analyses of transcripts or conveyed through written journal articles. In this talk, I will discuss the use of re-enactments both as a method of accounting for experience and as a method of research communication. I argue that they offer the potential for more valid understandings and representations of mathematical activity.

BIOGRAPHY

Nathalie Sinclair is a Distinguished University Professor at Simon Fraser University. She is interested in the historical, philosophical and technological aspects of mathematical thinking and learning, focusing both on aesthetics and embodiment in mathematical activity, particularly in contexts involving digital technologies. She co-authored Mathematics and the Body: Material Entanglements in the Classroom (with Elizabeth de Freitas), I Can’t Do Maths: Why Children Say it and How to Make a Difference (with Alf Coles) and Time and Education: Time Pedagogy against Oppression (with Petra Mikulan). She also led the development of the multitouch applications TouchCounts (2014) and TouchTimes (2019) with Nicholas Jackiw.

Professor Mercy Kazima

University of Malawi

Interventions and development of mathematics education in primary schools

In this presentation I will discuss the work of two research and development projects in my country, Malawi, that I coordinated since 2014, and how the work responded to the needs and context of mathematics education in Malawi. For more than two decades, Malawi has been concerned about low learner achievement in mathematics as indicated by national and international assessments. The concerns are similar to other countries in sub-Sahara Africa, where the mathematics achievement of most learners in primary schools is below their grade level. There have been some interventions aimed at addressing this concern by targeting schools, teachers and learners. I will share these briefly as part of the background. Then I will share the work of ‘my’ two projects called Improving quality and capacity of mathematics teacher education in Malawi project (2014-2019), and Strengthening numeracy in early years of primary school through professional development of teachers project (2017-2022). I will focus on the research and interventions by the projects – in particular the intervention on counting in the first two grades of primary school. Finally, I will discuss the findings and implications to mathematics education research in Malawi and other similar contexts.
BIOGRAPHY
 
Mercy Kazima is a Professor of Mathematics Education at the University of Malawi. Mercy has substantial experience in mathematics education research in the areas of mathematical knowledge for teaching, teaching and learning mathematics in multilingual classrooms, mathematics teacher education, and teaching mathematics in primary and secondary schools. She was president of the Southern Africa Association for Research in Mathematics Science and Technology Education (SAARMSTE) and has contributed to research in mathematics education in the region and beyond. She was a member of the ICM1 study 21 on mathematics education and language diversity. Mercy is involved in international collaborations in mathematics education; she has successfully led and completed two five-year international collaborative projects called Strengthening numeracy in early years of primary education through professional development of teachers (2017-2022), and Improving quality and capacity of mathematics teacher education in Malawi (2014-2018). Mercy is currently a member at large in the ICMI Executive Committee 2021-2024.

Clements-Foyster Lecture

The Clements-Foyster Lecture is an annual award, established in honour of  the two founding members of MERGA in 1976/1977, Professor Ken Clements (then at Monash University), and John Foyster (then based at the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER)). The first Clements-Foyster lecture was given in 2005, by Professor David Clarke, and since then, each year one Australian, New Zealander or a member from the South East Asian rim countries, is invited to present the Annual Clements-Foyster Lecture.

Professor Janette Bobis

University of Sydney

A deep dive into mathematics education research in search of significance

Doing significant research is critical to building the quality of mathematics education research. But doing substantively significant research is inherently difficult because we are studying the unknown. The ability to clearly articulate or ‘sell’ the significance of our research often poses even a greater challenge to researchers. Nevertheless, without such statements of significance we are unlikely to win grants or have papers accepted for publication. In this presentation, I consider what it means when we say that research is significant. My reflections draw upon my own experiences and those of others as part of a ‘deep dive’ in search of significance in mathematics education research.

BIOGRAPHY

Janette Bobis is a professor of mathematics education in the Sydney School of Education and Social Work at The University of Sydney. Her research, teaching and publications focus on teacher learning in mathematics education, and student learning, mainly concerning the development of primary children’s computational thinking strategies, their engagement in mathematics and the impact of teaching interventions on each of these aspects.

Janette’s research, teaching and professional expertise are internationally recognised, having been awarded Senior Fellow by the UK Higher Education Academy, the Thompson Research Fellowship, two Vice Chancellor awards for teaching excellence, a Carrick Citation for Outstanding Teaching and Research Supervisor of the year award. Her program of research has included four ARC projects and over 14 externally funded research consultancies with national and state education authorities. In 2023, she was part of the ARC EMC3 research team that won the MERGA Research Award for making an outstanding contribution to mathematics education research in the past three years. Janette has previously also received the MERGA Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award for her research on teacher education and the MERGA Early Career Award. She has been a member of MERGA and attended conferences since 1991. She was the MERGA Vice President Research 2015-2018 and has served on the MERJ editorial board since 2016. 

Since joining The University of Sydney as a lecturer of Primary Mathematics Education she has held several leadership roles, including Pro Dean and Associate Dean Research, Associate Dean Postgraduate & Doctoral Studies, Master of Teaching Program Director and is currently the Higher Degree Research Admissions Coordinator. She is committed to creating more effective ways of addressing the theory/practice nexus in mathematics education. Her vision is to empower teachers of mathematics with and through deeper understanding of their field and to this end, she strives to collaborate with teachers and teacher-researchers.

MERGA46 Program

Short Communications & Round Tables

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a short communication or round table 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 on the MERGA conference website at the time of the abstract submission

Submissions not exceeding one page are required for short communications and round tables. 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.

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 on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission

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 on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission)

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.