Authority, Autonomy, and Agency in Mathematics Education Research: A Systematic Review of Conceptualizations
Saved in:
| Title: | Authority, Autonomy, and Agency in Mathematics Education Research: A Systematic Review of Conceptualizations |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Daniel Edelen (ORCID |
| Source: | Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education. 2026 29(4):1-28. |
| Availability: | International Consortium for Research in Science & Mathematics Education. TCU Box 297900, Fort Worth, TX 76129. Tel: 817-257-6115; e-mail: ICRSME.Consultation@gmail.com; Web site: http://ejrsme.icrsme.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 28 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Information Analyses |
| Descriptors: | Literature Reviews, Mathematics Education, Educational Research, Educational Trends, Trend Analysis, Power Structure, Personal Autonomy, Citation Analysis, Taxonomy |
| ISSN: | 2692-241X |
| Abstract: | In this systematic review, we examine the conceptualization and historical grounding of the terms authority, autonomy, and agency within mathematics education research. These constructs are central to understanding power dynamics and fostering equitable participation in mathematical learning environments. Our review includes 36 empirical studies published up to 2021, analyzing their definitions, theoretical foundations, and intertextual references. Through a taxonomic and domain analysis, we identify seven distinct domains: mathematical authority, authority structures, authority relationships, autonomy as choice, sociomathematical autonomy, agency of the self, and agency through racial identities. Findings highlight the field's reliance on foundational theories, such as Weber's framework of authority, Piaget's developmental perspectives on autonomy, and Bandura's conceptualization of agency, often without deep engagement with their implications for contemporary educational contexts. While these constructs are frequently invoked, their inconsistent definitions and overlapping usage create conceptual ambiguity. Our analysis underscores the need for greater theoretical clarity and attention to the collective dimensions of autonomy and agency, which remain underexplored. We call on researchers to critically engage with the historical and epistemological roots of these constructs, explore their intersections, and prioritize equity-focused research. By offering a detailed taxonomy, this review provides a foundation for advancing theoretical precision and practical application in mathematics education. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1495712 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | In this systematic review, we examine the conceptualization and historical grounding of the terms authority, autonomy, and agency within mathematics education research. These constructs are central to understanding power dynamics and fostering equitable participation in mathematical learning environments. Our review includes 36 empirical studies published up to 2021, analyzing their definitions, theoretical foundations, and intertextual references. Through a taxonomic and domain analysis, we identify seven distinct domains: mathematical authority, authority structures, authority relationships, autonomy as choice, sociomathematical autonomy, agency of the self, and agency through racial identities. Findings highlight the field's reliance on foundational theories, such as Weber's framework of authority, Piaget's developmental perspectives on autonomy, and Bandura's conceptualization of agency, often without deep engagement with their implications for contemporary educational contexts. While these constructs are frequently invoked, their inconsistent definitions and overlapping usage create conceptual ambiguity. Our analysis underscores the need for greater theoretical clarity and attention to the collective dimensions of autonomy and agency, which remain underexplored. We call on researchers to critically engage with the historical and epistemological roots of these constructs, explore their intersections, and prioritize equity-focused research. By offering a detailed taxonomy, this review provides a foundation for advancing theoretical precision and practical application in mathematics education. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2692-241X |
