Expanding the disciplinary expertise of a middle school mathematics classroom: Re-contextualizing student models in conversations with visiting specialists

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 338-380

  Jurow, A Susan ^a   Hall, Rogers ^b   Ma, Jasmine Y ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 48049083548     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10508400802192714     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Beach, K. D. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. Review of Research in Education, 24, 124-149.
2. Becker, H. S. (1972). A school is a lousy place to learn anything in. In H. Becker (Ed.), Doing things together (pp. 173-190). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
3. Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. G. (2000). Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematics worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 171-200). Westport, CT: Ablex.
4. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 33-41.
5. Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
6. Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal data: A. practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271-315.
7. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
8. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A. once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettenen, & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). London: Cambridge University Press.
10. Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom.. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 451-498.
11. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399-483.
12. Erickson, F. (1982). Classroom, discourse as improvisation: Relationships between academic task structure and social participation, structure in lessons (pp. 155-181). In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communication in the classroom. New York: Academic Press.
13. Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30, 1-32.
14. Gibbons, P. (2006). Bridging discourses in the ESL classroom: Students, teachers, and researchers. London: Continuum.
15. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96, 606-633.
16. Goodwin, C. (2007). Environmentally coupled gestures (pp. 195-212). In S. Duncan, J. Cassell, & E. Levy (Eds.), Gesture, and the dynamic dimension of language: Essays in honor of David McNeill. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
17. Goodwin, M. H. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as social organization among black children. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
18. Greeno, J. G., & Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project Group. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53, 5-26.
19. Gutiérrez, K. D., Baquedano-López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286-303.
20. Hall, R. (1999). Case studies of math at work: Exploring design-oriented mathematical practices in school and work settings (Final report to the National Science Foundation; RED-9553648).
21. Hall, R., & Greeno, J. G. (in press). Learning and understanding concepts in practice. In T. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Hall, R., Lehrer, R., Lucas, D., & Schauble, L. (2004). Of grids and jars: A comparative analysis of representational infrastructure and learning opportunities in middle school and professional science. In Y. Kafai, W. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Embracing diversity in the learning sciences: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 238-245). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Hall, R., & Rubin, A. (1998). ... there's five little notches in here: Dilemmas in teaching and learning the conventional structure of rate. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 189-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hall, R., Stevens, R., & Torralba, A. (2002). Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(3), 179-210.
25. Hall, R., & Torralba, A. (1997, April). Bringing images of design-oriented work into middle school mathematics classrooms. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American. Educational Research. Association, Chicago, IL.
26. Hammer, D. (1995). Student inquiry in a physics class discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 401-430.
27. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Jr., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39-103.
29. Jurow, A. S. (2004). Generalizing in interaction: Middle school mathematics students making generalizations in a population-modeling project. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(4), 279-300.
30. Jurow, A. S. (2005). Shifting engagements in figured worlds: Middle school mathematics students' participation in an architectural design project. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 35-67.
31. Kirshner, B., & Geil, K. (2006, April). "I'm about to bring it!" Access points between youth activists and adult policymakers. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
32. Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle school science classroom: Putting Learning by Design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 495-547.
33. Kuhn, T. (1977). A function for thought experiments. In The essential tension (pp. 240-265). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1964)
34. Lee, C. D. (1995). A culturally based cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching African American high school students skills in literary interpretation. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 608-631.
35. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
36. Lynch, M., & Macbeth, D. (1998). Demonstrating physics lessons. In J. G. Greeno & S. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 269-297). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum..
37. McDermott, R., Gospodinoff, K., & Aron, J. (1978). Criteria for an ethnographically adequate description of concerted actions and their contexts. Semiotica, 24(3/4), 244-275.
38. Middle School Mathematics through Applications Project. (1997). Guppies. Palo Alto, CA: Institute for Research on Learning.
39. Moje, E., Ciechanokwski, K., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 38-70.
40. Moje, E., Tucker-Raymond, E., Varelas, M., & Pappas, C. C. (2007). FORUM: Giving oneself over to science-Exploring the roles of subjectivities and identities in learning science. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1, 593-601.
41. Ochs, E., Jacoby, S., & Gonzales, P. (1994). Interpretive journeys: How physicists talk and travel through graphic space. Configurations, 1, 151-171.
42. O'Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1993). Aligning academic task and participation status through revoicing: Analysis of a classroom discourse strategy. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24(4), 318-335.
43. O'Neill, D. K., & Polman, J. L. (2004). Why educate "little scientists?" Examining the potential of practice-based scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4/(3), 234-266.
44. O'Neill, D. K., Wagner, R., & Gomez, L. M. (1996, November). Online mentors: Experimenting in science class. Educational Leadership, 54(3), 39-42.
45. Pea, R. D. (1994). Seeing what we build together: Distributed multimedia learning environments for transformative communications. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 285-299.
46. Philips, S. U. (1972). Participant structures and communicative competence: Warm springs children in community and classroom. In C. Cazden, V. John, & D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language, in the classroom (pp. 370-394). New York: Teachers College Press.
47. Polman, J. L. (2004). Dialogic activity structures for project-based learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 431-466.
48. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
49. Saxe, G. B. (199.1). Culture and cognitive development: Studies in mathematical understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum..
50. Saxe, G. B., & Bermudez, T. (1996). Emergent mathematical environments in children's games. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Golding, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 51-68). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
51. Stenning, K., Greeno, J. G., Hall, R., Sommerfeld, M., & Wiebe, M. (2002). Coordinating mathematical with biological multiplication. Conceptual learning as the development of heterogeneous representation systems. In M. Baker, P. Brna, K. Stenning, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), The role of communication in learning to model (pp. 3-48). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
52. Stevens, R. (2000). Divisions of labor in school and in the workplace: Comparing computer and paper-supported activities across settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 373-401.
53. Stevens, R., & Hall, R. (1998). Disciplined perception: Learning to see in technoscience. In M. Lampert & M. Blunk (Eds.), Talking mathematics in school: Studies of teaching and learning (pp. 107-149). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
54. Tabak, I., & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 393-429.
55. Torralba, J. A. (2006). Learning to speak for nature: A case study of the development of scientists and their representational practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
56. van Oers, B. (1998). From context to contextualizing. Learning and Instruction, 8, 473-488.
57. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58. Wortham, S. (2005). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.