Validity and relevance: Comparing and combining two sociological perspectives on mathematics classroom practice

ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 215-224

  Gellert, Uwe ^a  

^a FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859265027     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-008-0074-3     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Adler, J. (2001). Teaching mathematics in multilingual classrooms. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2. Anyon, J. (1981). Social class and school knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 11(1), 3-42.
3. Artigue, M., Lenfant, A., & Roditi, E. (2005). Comparison of different theoretical frameworks in didactic analyses of videotaped classroom observations. In: Proceedings of the Fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1316-1326). Sant Feliu de Guíxols, Spain, 17-21 February 2005. Retrieved from http://ermeweb.free.fr/CERME4/.
4. Atweh, B., Bleicher, R. E., & Cooper, T. J. (1998). The construction of the social context of mathematics classrooms: a sociolinguistic perspective. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 63-82.
5. Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. London: Taylor & Francis.
6. Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse. An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 157-173.
7. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
8. Boaler, J. (1997). Experiencing school mathematics: teaching styles, sex and setting. Buckingham: Open University Press.
9. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In: J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook for theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood.
10. Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
11. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: SAGE Publications.
12. Bourne, J. (2003). Vertical discourse: the role of the teacher in the transmission and acquisition of decontextualised language. European Educational Research Journal, 2(4), 496-521.
13. Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. New York: Basic Books.
14. Cobb, P. (1995). Mathematical learning and small-group interaction: Four case studies. In: P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 25-129). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Cobb, P. (2007). Putting philosophy to work: Coping with multiple theoretical perspectives. In: F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3-38). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.
16. Cobb, P., & Bauersfeld, H. (1995). Introduction: the coordination of psychological and sociological perspectives in mathematics education. In: P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 1-16). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Cooper, B., & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing children's mathematical knowledge: Social class, sex and problem solving. Buckingham: Open University Press.
18. de Abreu, G. (2000). Relationships between macro and micro sociocultural contexts: implications for the study of interactions in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 1-29.
19. Dowling, P. (1998). The sociology of mathematics education: Mathematical myth/pedagogic texts. London: Routledge Falmer.
20. Dowling, P. (2008). Sociology as method: Departures from the forensics of culture, text and knowledge. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. (in press).
21. Even, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2003). Implications of competing interpretations of practice for research and theory in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54, 283-313.
22. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
23. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.
24. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. Baltimore: University Park.
25. Karabel, J., & Halsey, A. H. (1977). Educational research: a review and interpretation. In: J. Karabel, & A. H. Halsey (Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 1-85). New York: Oxford University Press.
26. Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In: P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 229-269). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Krummheuer, G. (2000). Mathematics learning in narrative classroom cultures: studies of argumentation in primary mathematics education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 20(1), 22-32.
28. Krummheuer, G. (2007). Argumentation and participation in the primary mathematics classroom. Two episodes and related theoretical abductions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 60-82.
29. Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.
30. Lerman, S., & Tsatsaroni, A. (1998). Why children fail and what mathematics education studies can do about it: The contribution/role of sociology. In: Proceedings of the First International Mathematics Education and Society Conference, Centre for the Study of Mathematics Education (pp. 26-33). Nottingham: MES.
31. Lerman, S., & Zevenbergen, R. (2004). The socio-political context of the mathematical classroom: using Bernstein's theoretical framework to understand classroom communications. In: P. Valero, & R. Zevenbergen (Eds.), Researching the sociopolitical dimensions of mathematics education: Issues of power in theory and methodology (pp. 27-42). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
32. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means towards mathematics for all: an exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 454-482.
33. Mason, J., & Waywood, A. (1996). The role of theory in mathematics education, research. In: A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 1055-1089). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
34. Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding inequality in schools: the contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology of Education, 65, 1-20.
35. Morais, A. M. (2002). Basil Bernstein at the micro level of the classroom. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23(4), 559-569.
36. Morais, A. M., & Miranda, C. (1996). Understanding teachers' evaluation criteria: a condition for success in science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 601-624.
37. Reckwitz, A. (2003). Die Krise der Repräsentation und das reflexive Kontingenzbewusstsein. Zu den Konsequenzen der post-empiristischen Wissenschaftstheorien für die Identität der Sozialwissenschaften. In: T. Bonacker, A. Brodocz, & T. Noetzel (Eds.), Die Ironie der Politik. Über die Konstruktion politischer Wirklichkeiten (pp. 85-103). Frankfurt: Campus.
38. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.
40. Sfard, A. (2002). There is more to discourse than meets the ears: looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46, 13-57.
41. Toulmin, S. (1969). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
42. Voigt, J. (1995). Thematic patterns of interaction and sociomathematical norms. In: P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 163-201). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
43. Zevenbergen, R. (2001). Mathematics, social class, and linguistic capital: an analysis of mathematical classroom interactions. In: B. Atweh, H. Forgasz, & B. Nebres (Eds.), Sociocultural research on mathematics education: An international perspective (pp. 201-215). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.