International curriculum and policy directions have called to embed critical thinking across discipline areas including mathematics; however, conceptually, this is under-theorised and under-researched in the field of mathematics education. This paper presents the conceptualisation of critical mathematical thinking (CMT) and the application of a literature informed conceptual framework; in particular, it examines what CMT capabilities young students exhibit as they enter formal schooling. We present the findings from one-on-one task-based interviews, undertaken with 16 young students (aged 5–6) as a means to investigate their CMT capabilities and refine the CMT framework. The interview data were analysed using the new critical mathematical thinking conceptual framework. The data confirms the definition and understanding of CMT in young students, indicating a need for curriculum refinement, improved teaching practices, and further research in this area.

High-quality Professional Experience (PEx) placements are central to the preparation of ‘classroom ready’ graduate teachers in Australia. However, there are frequent suggestions from the Australian Government that PEx is not as effective as it could be. Perennial PEx concerns raised in government reviews include: the need for strong partnerships between higher education providers and schools; the quality of ITE candidates and their suitability to teach; the ongoing shortage of high-quality placements and mentors; placement diversity and timing; student placement poverty; and the need to address workforce shortages. Against this backdrop we sought to systematically examine 60 stakeholder submissions to Reform Area 3 of the Australian Government’s 2023 Teacher Education Expert Panel Discussion Paper, which recommended new PEx guidelines, system-level partnership agreements, Centres of Excellence, and student support to ‘improve the quality of practical experience in teaching’. Using content analysis software Leximancer, we mapped themes and perspectives in the responses of seven stakeholder groups, each with distinct motivations and expertise: higher education providers, regulatory bodies, Councils of Deans, employers, teachers’ associations, advocates and individuals. An eighth group, ‘other’ represented three stakeholders that did not fit existing categories. Three overarching meta-themes were identified: (i) provision of funding and resources, (ii) creation of high-quality placements, and (iii) the necessity (or not) of new partnership agreements. While stakeholders noted broad support for the recommendations of the Discussion Paper, a diversity of perspectives was evident in their discussion of resources and preference for ‘centralised’ agreements to support consistent and widespread delivery of high-quality PEx.

To examine current support mechanisms for supervising teachers and tertiary supervisors in professional experience placements, we investigated the perceived effectiveness of and explored strategies for enhancing university–school collaboration through the lens of situated learning theory, operationalized via a Communities of Practice framework. Data were collected from 282 interview participants across multiple institutions. Findings reveal opportunities for enhancing support mechanism availability and effectiveness, with many supervising teachers expressing interest in additional preparation and ongoing support. University supervisors highlight opportunities to strengthen communication and resource allocation to enhance school collaboration. These findings suggest that systematic investment in community-building approaches, strengthening domain knowledge, fostering mutual engagement through collaborative professional learning, and developing shared practices through effective boundary objects, is essential to transforming fragmented supervision practices into coherent communities of practice that enhance professional experience quality and university–school partnerships.