An Analysis of Democracy in Mathematics Classrooms Using the Open Approach
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze the characteristics of democracy in mathematics classrooms using the Open Approach, focusing on students’ behaviors and interactions within a collaborative learning environment that promotes free expression of ideas. The target group consisted of 39 elementary students (grades 4–6) by purposive sampling who had been taught using the Open Approach continuously for three years. Conducted during the first semester of the 2023 academic year. A qualitative research methodology was employed, collecting data through classroom observations, video recordings and field notes and analyzed using content analysis approach. The findings revealed that the Open Approach fosters a democratic classroom atmosphere where students actively engage in discussions, express their ideas, and critique concepts respectfully. Open Approach fostered all six aspects of democracy: high-trust relationships, student voice and agency, respect for diverse ideas, inclusive perspectives on challenging issues, structured group decision- making, and critical consciousness. This study presents a novel perspective that mathematics classrooms, often perceived as closed spaces for social participation, can be transformed into democratic learning environments. This transformation is possible when teachers design learning processes that genuinely allow students to express their voices. The study proposes that the Open Approach can serve as both a method for developing mathematical thinking and a pathway for cultivating democratic citizenship within the classroom.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The views, opinions, and pictures expressed in this journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and viewpoints of the editor and the editorial board. All rights are reserved by the authors and the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies of Mahidol University. No part of this journal may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing from the journal’s editor, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Non-commercial use of information in this journal must be properly referenced.
References
กนกรัตน์ เลิศชูสกุล. (2567). ผลกระทบ ผลสะเทือน และสิ่งที่ตามมา ขบวนการเคลื่อนไหวคนรุ่นใหม่ ปี 2563–2564 ต่อการเมืองและสังคมไทย. วารสารสังคมศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, 54(2), 288–317.
นิธิ เอียวศรีวงศ์. (2557). ชาติไทย เมืองไทย แบบเรียน และอนุสาวรีย์ (พิมพ์ครั้งท่ี 3). มติชน.
_______. (2560, 6 มกราคม). นิธิ เอียวศรีวงศ์: ความฝันบรรลุได้ต้องตื่นก่อน. มติชนสุดสัปดาห์. https://www.matichonweekly.com/column/article_20356
ยุทธพิชัย และ นฤมล ช่างศรี. (2565). การวิเคราะห์การคิดเชิงพีชคณิตในโจทย์ปัญหาจากหนังสือเรียนคณิตศาสตร์ชั้นประถมศึกษาปีท่ี1.ในชนันรัตน์ รูปใหญ่(บ.ก.), เอกสารหลงัการประชุม วิชาการนำเสนอผลงานวิจัยระดับบัณฑิตศึกษาครั้งที่14(น.180–191).บัณฑิตวิทยาลัย มหาวิทยาลัยราชภัฏอุบลราชธานี.
Baba, T., Shimada, I., Hattori, Y., & Fukuda, H. (2024). Categories and their relationships among socially open-ended problems. In Y. Dede, G. Marschall, & P. Clarkson (Eds.), Values and Valuing in Mathematics Education (pp. 287–311). Springer.
Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook: The cognitive domain. David McKay.
Boontinand, V. (2021). Educating for citizenship in a fragile democracy: Interrogating civic agenda in Thai higher education. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 53(3), 471–487.
Bunlang, S., Inprasitha, M., & Changsri, N. (2024). Students' mathematization in mathematics classrooms using the Thailand lesson study incorporated open approach model. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 13(1), 14–27.
Changsri, N., Inprasitha, M., Tang, K., Boonsena, N., & Pattanajak, A. (2024). The use of pattern blocks in developing students' higher-order thinking skills. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 13(4), 246–264.
Dewey, J., & Tampio, N. (2024). Democracy and education. Columbia University Press.
Inprasitha, M. (2011). One feature of adaptive lesson study in Thailand: Designing a learning unit. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in Southeast Asia, 34(1), 47–66.
Inprasitha, M. (2019). A new model of mathematics curriculum and instruction system in Thailand. In C. Vistro-Yu & T. Toh (Eds.), School mathematics curricula: Mathematics education – An Asian perspective (pp. 51–77). Springer.
_______. (2022). Lesson study and open approach development in Thailand: A longitudinal study. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 11(5), 1–15.
_______. (2023). Blended learning classroom model: a new extended teaching approach for new normal. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 12(4), 288-300.
Inprasitha, M., Isoda, M., & Araya, R. (2023). Mathematical literacy for digital era: Review of mathematical thinking and computational thinking for curriculum development. East- West Journal of Mathematics, 24(2), 137–155.
Intaros, P., & Inprasitha, M. (2019). How students’ mathematical ideas emerged through flow of lesson in classroom using lesson study & open approach. Psychology, 10, 864–876.
Gonzalez, L. (2024). Mathematics curriculum as a vehicle for democracy and social justice. Curriculum Perspectives, 44(4), 453-461.
Khathippatee, Y. (2025, March 2). Exploring the role of open class in TLSOA model for professional development and school reform: A case study of Bansoktae School [Abstract]. In The 12th International Conference on School as Learning Community (p. 35). Gakushuin University.
Kongkirati, P. (2019). From illiberal democracy to military authoritarianism: Intra-elite struggle and mass-based conflict in deeply polarized Thailand. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 681(1), 24–40.
Manmai, T., Inprasitha, M., & Changsri, N. (2021). Cognitive aspects of students’ mathematical reasoning habits: A study on utilizing lesson study and open approach. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 29(4), 2591–2614.
Marschall, C., & Crawford, E. (2022). Worldwise learning: A teacher’s guide to shaping a just, sustainable future. Corwin.
Moonpo, P., Inprasitha, M., & Changsri, N. (2018). Algebraic Reasoning in Early Grade: Promoting through Lesson Study and Open Approach. Psychology, 9, 1558-1569.
Nasinsroy, J., Inprasitha, M., & Changsri, N. (2021). Synthesis of research on mathematical thinking development under the lesson study and open approach context. Randwick International of Education and Linguistics Science Journal, 2(3), 296–306.
Sant, E. (2019). Democratic education: A theoretical review (2006–2017). Review of Educational Research, 89(5), 655–696.
Saripan S., Changsri N., & Inprasitha M. (2024). An Analysis of Students’ Mathematical Thinking Through Task Sequence on Division in Classroom Using Open Approach. In The Asian Conference on Education 2023: Official Conference Proceedings. (pp. 1935- 1945). IAFOR.
Scherling, J., & Kasa, T. (2024). Navigating the complexities of resistance in critical human rights education to promote democracy. Ethics and Education, 56(14), 1–23.
Simon, M. A. (2019). Analyzing qualitative data in mathematics education. In K. R. Leatham (Ed.), Designing, conducting, and publishing quality research in mathematics education (pp. 111–122). Springer.
Skovsmose, O. (2023). Democracy and erosions. In O. Skovsmose (Ed.), Critical mathematics education (pp. 33–45). Springer.
Tan, C. (2024). A Confucian approach to a democratic classroom. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 56(12), 1–12.
Westheimer, J. (2022). Can teacher education save democracy?. Teachers College Record, 124(3), 42–60.
