论文部分内容阅读
The pursuit of commensurability in international comparative research by imposing general classificatory frameworks can misrepresent valued performances, school knowledge and classroom practice as these are actually conceived by each community and sacrifice validity in the interest of comparability.The "validity-comparability compromise" is proposed as a theoretical concern with significant implications for international cross-cultural research with respect to both comparisons of curricula and of classroom practice.Differences in the prioritisation of "core competencies" in various curricula have implications for both mathematical content and the types of classroom activities by which each nations curricular agenda is promoted.International comparisons must accommodate such differences with care.Current international research is used to illustrate a variety of aspects of the issue and its consequences for the manner in which international research is conducted and its results interpreted.The effects extend to data generation and analysis and constitute essential contingencies on the interpretation and application of international comparative research.