Abolfazl Rafiepour, Danyal Farsani


In this paper, six mathematics curriculum changes in Iran will be reviewed, spanning from 1900 until the present time. At first, change forces, barriers, and the main features of each curriculum reform will be represented. The first five curriculum changes are described briefly and the sixth and most recent curriculum reform will be elaborated. In this paper, we call the last reform as contemporary school mathematics curriculum change. This recent (contemporary) curriculum reform will be explained in more detail, followed by a discussion of the effect of globalization and research finding in the field of mathematics and mathematics education (in the Iranian mathematics curriculum). In total, three key ideas are distinguished as an effect of globalization which is “New Math”, “International Comparative Studies”, and “Computational Thinking”. Finally, the paper comments on the necessity of paying more attention to information and communication technology as part of globalization; in particular, recall policy-makers to consider “Computational Thinking” as an important component of future curriculum design.


Computational Thinking; School Mathematics Curriculum; Globalization; Curriculum Change

Full Text:



Abrahamson, D., Berland, M., Shapiro, B., Unterman, J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Leveraging epistemological diversity through computer-based argumentation in the domain of probability. For the Learning of Mathematics, 26(3), 19-45.

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education: Implications for policy and practice. European Union. Retrieved from:

Buteau, C. Gueudet, G. Muller, E. Mgombelo, J., & Sacristán, A. I. (2020). University students turning computer programming into an instrument for ‘authentic’ mathematical work. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1020-1041,

de Lange, J. (2021). There Is, Probably, No Need for a Design Framework. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(2), 365-388.

Eisner, E. W. (2004). What Can Education Learn from the Arts about the Practice of Education?. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 5(4), 1-13.

Esmaili, M., Bahrami, M., Khalilarjmand, M., Sosanabadi, F., Shojaieardakani, M., Sadegh, M., Zeighami, H., Tarzi, M., Farjad, S., Kiani, S., Hodarzi, R., Mostafavi, M., Makinayeri, A., Niazi, M., & Niknejad, B. (2020). Work and Technology for Grade 9. Tehran: Ministry of Education of Iran.

European Mathematical Society. (2011). Position paper on the European Commission’s contributions to European research. Retrieved from uropean_mathematical_society.pdf

Farsani, D. (2015). Making Multi-Modal Mathematical Meaning in Multilingual Classrooms. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Birmingham.

Farsani, D. (2016). Complementary functions of learning mathematics in complementary schools. In P. C. Clarkson & A. Halai (Eds.), Teaching & Learning Mathematics in Multilingual Classrooms: Issues for policy, practice and teacher education (pp. 227-247). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Farsani, D., Breda, A., & Sala, G. (2020). Cómo los gestos de los maestros afectan a la atención visual de las estudiantes durante el discurso matemático? REDIMAT – Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 9(3), 220-242.

Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J. M., Minniti, L., & White, B. J. G. (2017). Computational Thinking, Grade 1 Students and the Binomial Theorem. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3, 77-96.

Gardner, H. (2006). Five minds of the future. New York: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Gholam-Azad, S. (2015). Textbooks: A Challenge in School Mathematics Education. Presented in the seminar of Mathematical Science and Challenges. Tarbiat Modares University. Tehran, Iran.

Gooya, Z. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs about a new reform in high school geometry in Iran. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(3), 331–347.

Gooya, Z. (2010). A critical review of the Newly Proposed National Curriculum of the I.R. of Iran with Emphasis on the Mathematics Curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 5(18), 147-164.

Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2015). Revisiting programming to enhance mathematics learning. Paper presented at the Math + Coding Symposium, Western University.

Jalili, M. (2016). What Mathematics Do We Inherit? Some memories about Iran and world curriculum changes. Roshd Mathematics Educational Journal, 28(1), 4-7.

Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2013). Computer programming goes back to school. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 61-65.

Kaiser, G., & MaaB, K. (2007). Modeling in Lower Secondary Mathematics Classroom- Problems and Opportunities. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. W. Henn and M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathematics education, 14th ICMI study (pp.99-108). New York: Springer.

Kaufmann, O. T., & Stenseth, B. (2020). Programming in mathematics education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(7), 1029-1048.

Khani, N., & Rafiepour, A. (2015). Content Analysis of New Version of Primary School Mathematics Textbooks upon Modelling Approach. In the 7th National Conference on Education. Tehran, Iran.

Kiamanesh, A. R. (2005). The role of students’ characteristics and family background in Iranian students’ mathematics achievement. Prospects, 35(2), 161–174.

Krause, K., & Farsani, D. (In Press). Gestures and Code-Switching in mathematics instruction – an exploratory case study. Psychology of Mathematics Education.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Leron, U., & Dubinsky, E. (1995). An abstract algebra story. American Mathematical Monthly, 102(3), 227-242.

Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61.

Marshall, N. (2012). Contextualizing the learning activity of designing and experimenting with interactive, dynamic mathematics exploratory objects. Unpublished M.Sc. project report. Brock University, St.Catharines, ON.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., & Foy, P. (with Olson, J.F., Preuschoff, C., Erberber, E., Arora, A., & Galia, J.). (2008). TIMSS 2007 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Results in Mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 International Results in Mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.

Office for Developing National Curriculum. (2010). National Curriculum of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Third Edition, Tehran, Iran: Organization for Research & Educational Planning, Ministry of Education.

Orton, W. R. (1981). School mathematics in Iran, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 12(4), 473-479.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.

Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1-12). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Rafiepour, A., Stacey, K., & Gooya, Z. (2012). Investigating Grade Nine Textbook Problems for Characteristics Related to Mathematical Literacy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(4), 403-421.

Rafiepour, A. (2012). Content Analysis of Calculus Textbook Problems upon Modeling Approach. Quarterly Journal of Curriculum Studies, 6(24), 135-156.

Rafiepour, A. (2014). Modeling and application in Iranian Mathematics Education Community: Research and Practice. In Donald Saari (Ed.). Challenges of Mathematics Education (An American and Iranian Discussion) (pp. 67-69). MAA.

Rafiepour, A. (2016). Role of Modelling and Application in Mathematics Teacher Education Program in Iran. Proceedings of 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education- Topic Study Group 21. Hamburg, Germany: ICME.

Rafiepour, A. (2018). Iran School Mathematics Curriculum: Past, Present and Future. ICMI study 24 Conference proceeding (School Mathematics Curriculum Reforms: Challenges, Changes and Opportunities) (pp. 467-474), 26-30 Nov, Tsukuba, Japan.

Rafiepour, A., & Molaie, R. (2020). Content Analysis of Mathematics Textbooks in Junior and Senior High Schools upon Modeling Approach. Research in Mathematics Education, 1(1), 29-44.

Rejali, A., & Parvaneh, S. A. (2019). Warning to the Iranian mathematical community and those interested in sustainable development. Farhang & Andishe Riazi [IMS], 38(65), 13-35

Rezaie, M. (2016). Historical view on developing mathematics textbooks in Iran. Farhang and Andishe-ye Riyazi, An Expository Journal of the Iranian Mathematics Society, 35(1), 53-65.

Rosa, M., Farsani, D., & Silva, C. (2020). Mathematics education, body and digital games: The perception of body-proper opening up horizons of mathematical knowledge constitution. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 12(2), 310-324.

Rostami, B. (1978). Change in mathematics education since the late 1950's—Ideas and realization Iran. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 9(2), 255-260.

Stacey, K., Almuna, F., Caraballo, R. M., Chesne, J., Garfunkel, S., Gooya, Z., Kaur, B., Lindenskov, L., Lupianez, J. P., Park, K. M., Perl, H., Rafiepour, A., Rico, L., Salles, F., & Zulkardi. (2015). PISA’s Influence on Thought and Action in Mathematics Education. In K. Stacey & R. Turner (Eds). Assessing Mathematical Literacy: The PISA Experience (pp. 275-303). Springer.

Shodiev, H. (2014). Computational thinking and simulations in teaching science and mathematics Paper presented at the AMMCS-2013 Interdisciplinary Conference Series: Applied Mathematics, Modelling, and Computational Science.

Verschaffel, L. (2002). Taking the modeling perspective seriously at the elementary school level: promises and pitfalls (plenary lecture). In A.D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceeding of the 26th Conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, Vol. 1 (pp. 64-80). Norwich, England University of East Anglia.

Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms. Journal for Science Education and Technology, 25, 127-147.

Wilensky, U. (1995). Paradox, programming and learning probability. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 14(2), 231-280.

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.

Wing, J. M. (2014). Computational thinking benefits society. Social Issues in Computing, 40th Anniversary Blog, University of Toronto. Retrieved from



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Journal on Mathematics Education
Doctoral Program on Mathematics Education
Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sriwijaya
Kampus FKIP Bukit Besar
Jl. Srijaya Negara, Bukit Besar
Palembang - 30139

p-ISSN: 2087-8885 | e-ISSN: 2407-0610

Creative Commons License
Journal on Mathematics Education (JME) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

View My Stats