An Evolution of Mathematics Curriculum

Additional findings from our Curriculum Content Mapping analysis are included below and may be of particular interest to researchers and experts who would appreciate a deeper dive into the data behind each of the competencies.

Co-agency refers to “the interactive, mutually supportive relationships that help learners to progress towards their valued goals” (OECD, 2020[2]). Developing co-agency can help to foster teamwork, communication and mutual responsibility among students. In the context of mathematics, co-agency can encourage students to engage in collaborative problem-solving, share different perspectives and work together to tackle complex mathematical tasks. In general, countries/jurisdictions place a varying emphasis on co-agency in their curricula, with Kazakhstan, China and Korea embedding co-agency in over 50% of their curriculum items while Sweden, Greece and the Netherlands integrate it in less than 10% of their curricula (Figure A.1).

In mathematics, in most countries/jurisdictions, co-agency is embedded across several subjects, particularly in national language, arts and technologies/home economics. Only a few countries/jurisdictions, including British Columbia (Canada), Japan and Saskatchewan (Canada), embed co-agency within their mathematics education.

Learning to learn or meta-learning is defined as the awareness and understanding of the phenomenon of learning itself, which enables students to take control of one’s own learning. Implicit in this definition is the learner’s perception of the learning context, including understanding what the expectations of the discipline are and the demands of a given learning task. Learning to learn is a key competency in modern education, enabling students to develop metacognitive skills, adapt to new challenges, and take responsibility for their own learning process. It equips students with the ability to set learning goals, monitor progress, and adjust strategies based on outcomes, fostering lifelong learning (OECD, 2020[2]). The variation of embedding this important concept in country curricula is quite large, ranging from barely 10% to 70% of mapped curriculum content (Figure A.2).

Especially for mathematics, it is an important competency for fostering resilience and helping students learn to overcome setbacks and continue progressing in their mathematical journey.

Despite the importance of this concept for mathematics, it is barely reflected in any countries’ mathematics curriculum, except for British Columbia (17%), Saskatchewan (14%) (both Canada), Lithuania (13%) and, to a much lesser extent, Estonia (4%). Most countries/jurisdictions embed learning to learn in national language, technologies/home economics, science and humanities. For example, China (20%), Korea (19%) and Kazakhstan (18%) focus extensively on national language to embed learning to learn in their curriculum.

Physical/health literacy is defined as the ability and motivation to integrate physical, psychological, cognitive and social competencies into a healthy and active lifestyle. This involves the acquisition of fitness and movement skills; positive attitudes towards movement and understanding how and why to engage in movement activities. Health literacy tends to be linked to better access and use of health services, and to maintaining health and wellness (e.g. nutrition, mental health, relationships and keeping safe) throughout the life span. Physical/health literate students have the knowledge, skills and attitudes (including motivation) to access, understand, evaluate and apply health information to make appropriate decisions regarding safe and healthy practices and behaviours (OECD, 2020[2]). Countries/jurisdictions integrate physical/health literacy into various subjects (Figure A.3).

While not traditionally associated with mathematics (which is reflected in the Figure A.3, below), these competencies play an important role in math education by supporting students’ well-being and enhancing their learning abilities – contextualising math in areas of personal relevance (tracking fitness progress, calculating nutritional values, etc.), increasing interdisciplinary learning and developing problem-solving skills through logical and quantitative thinking.

Almost no countries/jurisdictions in the study embed physical/health literacy within their mathematics curricula – exceptions are found in Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) and Greece, at 2% and 1% respectively. As expected, most countries focus heavily on embedding this competency into physical education and health (PE/health), with countries like Kazakhstan (37%), Estonia (36%) and China (30%) embedding physical/health literacy extensively across the curriculum. In addition to PE/health, subjects such as science and technologies/home economics also frequently feature physical and health literacy content. For example, in China, 12% of the mapped curriculum targeting physical and health literacy is embedded within science. Similarly, Lithuania and Estonia integrate health literacy within science, reflecting an emphasis on the scientific understanding of health.

Self-control is defined as the ability to delay gratification, control impulses and manage emotional expression. Self-control is an umbrella construct that bridges concepts and measurements from different disciplines (e.g. impulsivity, conscientiousness, delay of gratification, inattention-hyperactivity, executive function, willpower, intertemporal choice) (OECD, 2020[2]). Self-control is embedded in curricula to varying degrees across countries and jurisdictions (Figure A.4).

In mathematics, students need to resist distractions and maintain focus – making self-control a crucial component of success.

However, mathematics, despite being a subject where self-control is critical, does not show high levels of embedding across most countries, with exceptions being Korea (9%) and Greece (1%). Subjects such as national language, PE/health, and science are more likely to embed self-control, as these areas require consistent focus and discipline. For example, Kazakhstan, Korea, Estonia and China all dedicate around 15% of their content items on self-control to their national language curriculum, making it the most prominent subject for this competency.

Empathy, defined as the capacity to understand, share and respond with care to the emotions and perspectives of others, is a vital competency for fostering social cohesion and emotional intelligence. It involves not only cognitive skills, such as perspective-taking, but also emotional and social skills, enabling individuals to connect with others, particularly those who are different from themselves (OECD, 2020[2]). Though not traditionally associated with mathematics (which is reflected in Figure A.5 below), empathy plays an important role in the mathematics context by fostering an inclusive, supportive learning environment and improving collaborative problem solving – ultimately promoting socio-emotional growth.

Despite its importance for mathematics, empathy is almost never explicitly embedded within mathematics education in most countries/jurisdictions, with the focus generally being on more traditionally social subjects: only Korea (3%) and British Columbia (Canada) (1%) embed it, to a minimal extent, in their mathematics curricula. Countries like Estonia (51%) and Korea (51%) embed empathy across more than half of their curricula, with a significant focus on subjects such as national language, humanities and arts. In contrast, countries/jurisdictions like Saskatchewan (Canada) and Sweden integrate empathy into only around 13% of their mapped curricula.

Trust is an attitude developed towards individuals and institutions/organisations based on a belief in the reliability and integrity of actions taken or planned. Trust is formed when one is confident that the actions of others are primarily based on good intentions and ethical considerations rather than being aimed to negatively impact individuals or groups. Trust is a multi-dimensional construct which is formed when care, competence and openness are exhibited by individuals and institutions/organisations. The degree of personal and/or societal wellness is closely related to the level of trust held within a community (OECD, 2020[2]). The emphasis on trust varies significantly across countries (Figure A.6).

Trust in mathematics isn’t just about believing in one’s own abilities; it’s about creating a classroom culture where students feel safe, valued and encouraged to explore, make mistakes and grow. This foundation of trust is essential for meaningful, confident and resilient learning in mathematics.

Notably, trust is only rarely incorporated into mathematics education (British Columbia and Saskatchewan (both Canada) at 1%), as it is more frequently embedded in subjects traditionally linked to social interactions, such as humanities and national language. Estonia (38%), China (36%) and Kazakhstan (29%) lead in integrating trust-related content into their curricula, with trust being embedded across a wide range of subjects, including national language, humanities, PE health and science. In contrast, countries like Greece (2%) and the Netherlands (2%) place much less focus on trust in their curricula.

Respect involves valuing oneself, others, and the environment, with regard for the feelings, rights, and surroundings of individuals and nature. It is shaped by cultural norms and is demonstrated through behaviour and communication. Respect for cultural diversity means appreciating differences among people, while respect for nature reflects environmental ethics (OECD, 2020[2]). Countries embed respect to a varying degree in their curricula (Figure A.7).

In mathematics, respect plays a role in fostering collaboration, encouraging productive discussions, and valuing diverse perspectives during problem-solving. On the other hand, respect can also be fostered through mathematics education by using heterogeneous grouping and complex instruction, which encourages students to appreciate diverse perspectives and take responsibility for each other's learning, promoting relational equity (Boaler, 2006[3]).

However, respect is almost never explicitly integrated into mathematics, with only Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) (4%), Korea (3%), and British Columbia (Canada) (1%) showing any inclusion of respect in their mathematics curricula. Subjects such as national language, humanities and arts tend to feature respect more prominently, with for example Kazakhstan and China embedding it 18% and 17% respectively in their national language curricula. Countries/jurisdictions such as Estonia (54%), Korea (51%) and Lithuania (48%) show a high degree of embedding respect across different subjects in their curricula. On the other hand, countries like Portugal (13%) and Sweden (17%) display a relatively lower integration of respect.

Reconciling tensions and dilemmas – which encompasses the construct of conflict resolution – refers to the ability to navigate complex and often conflicting issues, trade-offs and competing priorities in a constructive, forward-looking manner. It involves acknowledging that many situations do not have simple either-or solutions, and instead require a nuanced approach that integrates diverse perspectives and goals. Conflict resolution requires purposeful listening, clarification of viewpoints, finding common understandings or viewpoints, identifying solutions and evaluating outcomes as methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful end of conflict and resolution. (OECD, 2020[2]). Figure A.8 shows that the emphasis on embedding these competencies into curricula varies across countries/jurisdictions.

In mathematics, the skill of reconciling tensions and dilemmas can help students approach problems with a mindset that there might be multiple ways to solve a problem or address a challenge. It encourages reflective thinking and the ability to manage ambiguity, which is particularly relevant in the context of real-world problem-solving where mathematics is applied.

This competency is often integrated across multiple subject areas, including national language, humanities and science, while its presence in mathematics remains limited, with few countries/jurisdictions embedding it in this learning area. Exceptions can be seen in Saskatchewan (4%) and British Columbia (1%) (both Canada), as well as Estonia (1%), with a close to negligeable share of integration. Estonia (37%), China (34%) and Korea (33%) have the highest percentage of their curricula focusing on reconciling tensions and dilemmas. Countries like Portugal (3%) and Greece (9%) show the least focus on embedding reconciling tensions and dilemmas into their curricula.

Taking responsibility refers to the ability to act responsibly for a good cause, principles and integrity for individual and collective well-being. A responsible person demonstrates the willingness to accept praise, blame, reward or punishment for an act or omission, and to accept the consequences of their behaviour, they have a commitment to the group and others, they can be depended on, and they have integrity (OECD, 2020[2]). As shown in Figure A.9, there is significant variation in how countries/jurisdictions integrate taking responsibility into their curricula.

In the mathematics context, responsibility plays an important role encouraging students to approach learning with accountability, discipline and sense of ownership – it empowers students to take charge of their learning, approach challenges thoughtfully and develop strong study habits that support their success.

Interestingly, taking responsibility appears less frequently in mathematics across most countries/jurisdictions, with only a few countries/jurisdictions like Estonia, Korea and Saskatchewan (Canada) (all at 3%) including it in this subject. This trend highlights the general perception that taking responsibility may be more naturally addressed in the context of social sciences, though its relevance in mathematics education – particularly in relation to problem-solving, integrity in data interpretation and accountability for solutions – should not be overlooked. Estonia (68%), China (54%) and Lithuania (53%) lead in embedding taking responsibility across a wide range of subjects, including national language, humanities and science. In contrast, countries like Portugal (5%) and Japan (11%) have a much lower percentage of curriculum items targeting taking responsibility.

Entrepreneurship is defined as the ability to add value. It involves evaluating situations, organising resources, and creating and developing opportunities for adding value. This value might be a product, service, idea or a solution to address an issue or satisfy a need (OECD, 2020[2]). Most countries/jurisdictions that participated in the CCM do not place much importance on entrepreneurship, with it being embedded in under 10% of their curricula (Figure A.10).

Integrating entrepreneurial competencies into mathematics lessons has been shown to transform the learning environment, giving students opportunities to engage with mathematical concepts in new, creative ways (Lindberg and Nahnfeldt, 2017[4]). This can encourage deeper mathematical discussions, collaboration, and the application of problem-solving skills in real-world contexts. Entrepreneurial competencies help students develop agency in their learning, fostering a mindset where they take initiative, handle complex problems, and apply mathematical reasoning without relying solely on formulaic instructions. This not only enhances mathematical understanding but can also prepare students for the kinds of challenges they may face beyond the classroom.

Given its importance for mathematics, it is surprising that most countries/jurisdictions rather embed entrepreneurship within their technologies/home economies, humanities or sciences subjects, while it appears to a far smaller extent in mathematics. Only three countries/jurisdictions – Japan (13%), Kazakhstan (7%) and British Columbia (Canada) (1%) – integrate entrepreneurship within their mathematics education. However, some countries/jurisdictions, such as Japan and Estonia, integrate entrepreneurship more extensively into their curricula, with the competency integrated into 56% and 40% of their mapped curriculum items, respectively, while giving priority to science (17% for Japan) and national language curricula (13% for Estonia).

Media literacy is defined as the ability to think critically and analyse what one reads in the media, including social media and news sites. This includes recognising “fake news”, or the ability to distinguish what is true from what is not, as well as to be able to assess, evaluate and reflect on the information that is given in order to make informed and ethical judgements about it (OECD, 2020[5]). As shown in Figure A.11, there is significant variation in how countries/jurisdictions integrate media literacy into their curricula.

Media literacy in mathematics helps students not only understand how numerical and visual data function, but also equips them to critically evaluate the information they encounter.

In most countries, media literacy is embedded in subjects such as national language, humanities and technology/home economics. For example, Korea dedicates 19% of its content items in national language curricula to media literacy. However, British Columbia (Canada) (17%) stands out as an exception, embedding medial literacy mostly into their mathematics curriculum, followed to a much lesser extent by Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) (5%), Saskatchewan (Canada) (4%), Korea (3%), the Netherlands (2%) and Sweden (1%).

Global competency refers to the ability to explore local, global and intercultural issues, understand and appreciate diverse perspectives, engage in open and effective communication with people from different cultures, and take action for collective well-being. (OECD, 2020[5]). Most countries/jurisdictions embed global competency in less than 30% of their mapped curriculum items (Figure A.12).

For the mathematics context, incorporating global competency into math education cultivates a more holistic view, encouraging students to become globally-minded problem solvers who can effectively apply their skills across diverse contexts. This not only enriches their understanding of mathematics but also prepares them to address complex issues in an interconnected world.

Countries/jurisdictions primarily focus on subjects such as arts, humanities and national language to embed global competency in their curricula. However, as with media literacy, British Columbia (Canada) is the outlier, dedicating 17% of content items in their math curricula to global competency learning. British Columbia is followed by Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) (5%), Korea (3%) and Sweden (1%), embedding global competency to a much lesser extent into maths, while prioritising national language and humanities (for Korea and Sweden), respectively.

The Anticipation-Action-Reflection (AAR) cycle is a process that encourages individuals to anticipate possible outcomes, take informed actions and reflect on the consequences of those actions to foster continuous improvement and learning. This cyclical approach helps individuals and groups navigate complex situations, adjust strategies and enhance their decision-making skills by learning from both successes and failures.

Anticipation, the first element of the AAR cycle, is defined as the ability to foresee or predict the consequences of actions, both in the short- and long-term, while also being able to understand others' intentions and feelings. This competency is crucial for enabling individuals to take responsibility for their decisions, influence outcomes and shape their own futures (OECD, 2020[2]).

Countries/jurisdictions vary in the extent to which they embed anticipation in their curricula (Figure A.13).

From a mathematics perspective, anticipation is a key competency for certain types of data analysis involving predictions, simulations and forecast. It builds students’ strategic thinking and fosters their adaptability, all essential skills for both theoretical mathematics and practical applications in everyday life.

This importance is being recognised by countries/jurisdictions, who put a certain emphasis on embedding anticipation into their math curricula – most countries embed anticipation to at least a certain extent in math, ranging from 1% (the Netherlands) to 17% (British Columbia, Canada). Interestingly, national language is picked as the priority subject for anticipation for most countries, with for example Korea, Kazakhstan, China and Lithuania dedicating above 15% of their content items in this curriculum area to anticipation. In general, Kazakhstan (62%), Korea (61%) and China (54%) embed anticipation more extensively across multiple subjects, while countries like Greece (3%) and Japan (9%) show significantly lower integration.

Action as a competency involves the ability to act with a willingness and capacity for a defined purpose. It involves the individuals’ disposition to act on what they are learning or want to learn or in response to a situation; to utilise acquired skills to act or contribute to a situation or circumstances and to evaluate the impact of one’s actions (OECD, 2020[2]). Countries/jurisdictions take a diverse approach to embedding action in curricula (Figure A.14).

In mathematics, fostering action is crucial because it moves students beyond passive learning. By encouraging them to take action in their learning, students actively engage with mathematical concepts, try out new methods of problem-solving, and apply their knowledge to real-world tasks. This hands-on approach helps them develop critical thinking, adaptability and confidence in using mathematics in everyday life, from financial literacy to scientific analysis.

Most countries/jurisdictions embed action within national language, humanities, technologies/home economics or science, with less emphasis in mathematics. However, a few countries/jurisdictions, including British Columbia (Canada) (17%), Australia and Korea (both at 13%), also integrate action into their mathematics education. In general, China and Korea stand out for integrating action in over 70% of their curriculum items, while prioritising national language curricula to embed action (19% for both). In contrast, countries like Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) (21%) and Greece (25%) place less focus on cultivating action through their curricula.

Reflection is the ability to take a critical stance before deciding, choosing and acting, such as by stepping back from the assumed, known, apparent and accepted, comparing a given situation from another, different perspective, and looking beyond the immediate situation to the long-term and indirect effects of one’s decisions and actions. This enables individuals to reach a level of social maturity that allows them to adopt different perspectives, make independent judgments and take responsibility for their decisions and actions. The reflective approach is based on a model of human development in which individuals are able to integrate increasing levels of complexity into their thinking and actions (OECD, 2020[2]). Countries/jurisdictions embed reflection in their curricula to a varying degree (Figure A.15).

In mathematics, reflection is essential for students to critically evaluate their problem-solving approaches, understand mistakes, and refine their strategies. It helps them not only to solve mathematical problems but also to think about the reasoning behind their solutions, enabling deeper learning and more effective application of mathematical concepts to real-world situations.

While reflection is most often embedded into national language and technologies/home economics, it is also widely integrated into mathematics, especially in some countries/jurisdictions such as British Columbia (Canada) (17%), Japan (13%), Korea (13%) Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) (13%), and Saskatchewan (Canada) (12%). In general, countries/jurisdictions embed reflection across a wide range of subjects – even those that emphasise reflection to a lesser degree in their curricula (e.g. Portugal at 11% and Sweden at 22%) have reflection embedded in at least five out of seven learning areas.

[3] Boaler, J. (2006), “How a Detracked Mathematics Approach Promoted Respect, Responsibility, and High Achievement”, Theory Into Practice, Vol. 45/1, pp. 40-46, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4501_6.

[4] Lindberg, M. and C. Nahnfeldt (2017), “Idealistic incentives in non-governmental organization innovativeness: bridging theoretical gaps”, Prometheus, Vol. 35/2, https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2017.1396751.

[5] OECD (2020), Curriculum Overload: A Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3081ceca-en.

[2] OECD (2020), Technical report: Curriculum Analysis of the OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/2-5-supporting-materials/Technical%20_Report_Curriculum_Analysis_of_the_OECD_Future_of_Education_and_Skills_2030.pdf (accessed on 17 July 2024).

[1] OECD (2019), Education 2030 Curriculum Content Mapping: An Analysis of the Netherlands Curriculum Proposal, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/projects/edu/education-2040/6-bilateral-support/E2030_CCM_analysis_NLD_curriculum_proposal.pdf.