Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: For practicing and prospective secondary mathematics teachers, the role of mathematical reasoning and proof in their mathematical training is crucial for a number of reasons: (1) formal mathematical proof serves as a tool for teachers to develop a profound understanding of mathematics and as a means for communicating their understanding; (2) reasoning and proof are featured prominently in the secondary school curricula as envisioned in the NCTM Principles; and, (3) reasoning and proof can form the basis for the development and assessment of student learning and discourse. Following the scheme suggested by the Seldens (2003), we undertook a cross-sectional study of pre- and in-service secondary mathematics teachers’ abilities to validate purported proofs by mathematical induction with an eye toward determining what facets they attended to when reading such an argument. Of the 82 validation attempts only 9 correctly identified that the attempt was flawed.

The reviews of our article submission were mixed, including one reviewer who insisted that the proposition P(k+1) can be established by any means. This sparked an in-depth analysis of the mathematical induction argumentation style using Toulmin’s (1958) argumentation scheme. The concept of a warrant from Toulmin’s scheme is the logical connection between what is given in a proof and what is concluded. In this talk we will discuss the flawed arguments presented to the participants, how Toulmin’s scheme can be utilized to analyze students’ attempts at proof by mathematical induction, and how the scheme can be used as a pedagogical tool in the undergraduate mathematics classroom.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This work aims to stimulate a reflection about the sociology and criminology research difficulty of observing qualitative reforms in the penal system. When the literature identifies the changes within the framework of the penal system, the reforms highlighted are always related to the idea of the increase in the punitive and repressive character of the criminal law as they refer, in general, with a specific and emergency legislative process (Garland, Wacquant). However, without denying the existence of these changes, this paper supports the need for building a sociological concept of the reform of criminal law which makes it possible to identify the safeguarding of the penal system, but at the same time making room for the emergence of innovating ideas. We understand by innovating ideas the ideas "able to produce a qualitative change in the criminal law" (Pires). As useful concept to help us to identify, describe and understand the inertia and/or the change of the criminal law, this work defends the usefulness of the concept of modern penal rationality (Pires) as starting point for the analysis.

Le présent travail vise à susciter une réflexion sur la difficulté des recherches sociologiques/criminologiques d’observer réformes qualitatives dans le système pénal. Quand la littérature identifie les changements dans le cadre du système pénal, les réformes mises en relief sont toujours liées à l’idée de l’augmentation du caractère punitif et répressif du droit pénal ainsi qu’elles réfèrent, en général, à un processus législatif ponctuel et d’urgence (Garland, Wacquant). Toutefois, sans nier l’existence de ces changements, le présent travail soutient la nécessité de construire un concept sociologique de réforme du Code Pénal qui permet d’identifier le maintien du système pénal, mais aussi l’émergence d’idées innovatrices. Nous entendons par idées innovatrices les idées « capables de produire un changement qualitatif dans le régime du droit pénal » (Pires). Comment peut-on construire un système pénal plus juste et moins punitif et répressif? Comme concept-outil pour nous aider à identifier, décrire et comprendre l’inertie et/ou le changement du droit pénal, le présent travail défend l’utilité du concept de rationalité pénale moderne (Pires) comme point de départ de l’analyse.

Publication Type: Symposium Paper
Abstract: In Texas, the P-16 collaborative began in 1998 as an informal network called the Public Education/Higher Education Coordinating Group formed by the Commissioners of the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB), and the executive director of the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC). In 2003, the Texas Legislature formalized the system by passing SB 286, which created a P-16 Council, whose membership consisted of the executive leadership of TEA, THECB, SBEC, and Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). Two years later, the Legislature modified and strengthened the P-16 statute by passing HB 2808. The Office of P-16 Coordination was established within TEA.

On December 16, 2005, Governor Rick Perry issued Executive Order RP531 encouraging
creation of college readiness standards and programs for Texas public school students to ensure their academic success, as well the economic health of the state. The order mandated cooperation between public education and public higher education to enhance college readiness standards and programs to increase availability of information and opportunities for excellence in Texas education.

Texas Education Code §61.0761 (House Bill 1, 79th Legislature, Third Called Session) requires the biennial submission of a progress report regarding the creation and implementation of a P-16 College Readiness and Success Strategic Action Plan to members of the executive branch, Legislative Budget Board, and selected members of the Legislature. Adoption and implementation of the recommendations represent a coordinated approach for ensuring the seamless transitions and preparation required to make sure public school students graduate from ready to do college-level work.

The primary goals of a P-16 system for Texas are as follows:

• expand access to early learning for children ages 3 to 5 and improve their readiness for kindergarten,
• smooth student transitions from one level of learning to the next,
• close the achievement gap between white and minority students,
• upgrade teacher education and professional development,
• strengthen relationships between families and schools,
• create a wider range of learning experiences and opportunities for students in the final two years of high school, and
• improve college readiness and college success.

SOURCES: Texas Education Agency, Office of P-16 Coordination (date unknown). P-16 Coordination – Executive Summary; Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board/Texas Education Agency (December 2006), P-16 College Readiness and Success Strategic Action Plan Implementation Report: A Report to the 80th Texas Legislature from the Commissioner of Education and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Despite limited electoral and governmental reward, third parties commonly contest elections under single-member-district plurality (SMD-p) electoral rules. Even under the strong party duopoly of the United States, third parties continually contest local, state, and national elections. In this paper, we relax the assumption that third party candidates are motivated solely by the rewards of office and examine the incentives for them to contest elections under variations in electoral volatility and competition. We propose a curvilinear (U-shaped) relationship between electoral competition and third party participation. When electoral competition is either very low or very high we expect the number of third party candidates to be high, due to increased opportunity to draw attention to policy issues or affect the election outcome. We expect a positive relationship between electoral volatility and third party candidacies, since high volatility signals a de-aligned electorate. We test our claims using district-level data in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States from 1980-2000. The results of negative binomial regressions indicate that third parties are more likely to contest elections when electoral uncertainty is high.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Esta monografia tem como objetivo demonstrar os efeitos do duplo processo de liberalização econômica e democratização pós – 1985 no Brasil. Especificamente, no tocante às demandas do setor de educação pública superior paulistano. Subsidiariamente, proporemos ainda o instrumento de Cooperação Técnica Internacional como ferramenta para a manutenção do tripé Ensino-Pesquisa-Extensão nas universidades públicas paulistas.