Mathematics teachers’ ethical decision-making approaches in instructional practices

Abstract This paper investigates how mathematics teachers describe their ethical decision making related to instructional practices, drawing on frameworks that incorporate both rational and non-rational approaches. We employed a multiple-case study method, selecting three teachers as cases through criterion sampling. Data were collected via four consecutive in-depth semi-structured interviews across twelve scenarios designed to elicit teachers' ethical evaluations. The data were analysed through cross-case synthesis in two stages: first, a deductive content analysis of each case, followed by a comparative analysis across cases. Five key themes emerged: (1) the use of ethical and technical lenses, with technical considerations sometimes overshadowing ethical aspects; (2) the utilization of rational approaches, predominantly consequentialist and deontological; (3) the use of non-rational approaches, notably experience and obedience; (4) the coexistence of multiple rational approaches, which can lead to conflicts resolved either by the dominance of one approach or by the reconciliation of different perspectives; and (5) the concurrent emergence of rational and non-rational approaches, with non-rational evaluations potentially arising from a rational framework. We discuss the role of mathematics and its teaching/learning in teachers' ethical evaluations, the complexities of different decision-making approaches, and their co-emergence. Our findings provide foundational perspectives for developing an ethical decision-making model in mathematics education, which we outline and share.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Educational Studies in Mathematics
Published
2025-03-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-025-10396-y
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics in Business and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.17

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mathematics teachers’ ethical decision-making approaches in instructional practices

Mehmet Fatih Özmantar, Medine Coşkun, Ali Bozkurt
1 citations
Educational Studies in Mathematics
Ethics in Business and Education
4.17
article

Mathematics teachers’ ethical decision-making approaches in instructional practices

Mehmet Fatih Özmantar, Medine Coşkun, Ali Bozkurt
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper investigates how mathematics teachers describe their ethical decision making related to instructional practices, drawing on frameworks that incorporate both rational and non-rational approaches. We employed a multiple-case study method, selecting three teachers as cases through criterion sampling. Data were collected via four consecutive in-depth semi-structured interviews across twelve scenarios designed to elicit teachers' ethical evaluations. The data were analysed through cross-case synthesis in two stages: first, a deductive content analysis of each case, followed by a comparative analysis across cases. Five key themes emerged: (1) the use of ethical and technical lenses, with technical considerations sometimes overshadowing ethical aspects; (2) the utilization of rational approaches, predominantly consequentialist and deontological; (3) the use of non-rational approaches, notably experience and obedience; (4) the coexistence of multiple rational approaches, which can lead to conflicts resolved either by the dominance of one approach or by the reconciliation of different perspectives; and (5) the concurrent emergence of rational and non-rational approaches, with non-rational evaluations potentially arising from a rational framework. We discuss the role of mathematics and its teaching/learning in teachers' ethical evaluations, the complexities of different decision-making approaches, and their co-emergence. Our findings provide foundational perspectives for developing an ethical decision-making model in mathematics education, which we outline and share.

Educational Studies in MathematicsVol. 119(1)
Mi̇lli̇ Eği̇ti̇m Bakanliği (TR), Gaziantep University (TR)
Gaziantep Üniversitesi
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics in Business and Education
4.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.