Understanding mathematics textbooks through readeroriented theory
 Aaron Weinberg,
 Emilie Wiesner
 … show all 2 hide
Rent the article at a discount
Rent now* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Get AccessAbstract
Textbooks have the potential to be powerful tools to help students develop an understanding of mathematics. However, many students are unable to use their textbooks effectively as learning tools. This paper presents a framework that can be used to analyze factors that impact the ways students read textbooks. It adapts ideas from readeroriented theory and applies them to the domain of mathematics textbooks. In readeroriented theory, the reader is viewed as actively constructing meaning from a text through the reading process; this endeavor is shaped and constrained by the intentions of the author, the beliefs of the reader, and the qualities the text requires the reader to possess. This paper also discusses how reading mathematics textbooks is further constrained by the authority and closed structure of these textbooks. After describing the framework, the paper discusses recommendations for future avenues of research and pedagogy, highlighting the importance of teachers' roles in mediating their students' use of textbooks.
Inside
Within this Article
 Readeroriented theory
 Implications
 Conclusion
 References
 References
Other actions
 Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is—or might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–14.
 Bierhoff, H. (1996). A comparison of primary school textbooks in Britain, Germany, and Switzerland. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 15(4), 141–160. CrossRef
 Bleich, D. (1994). Epistemological assumptions in the study of response. In J. P. Tompkins (Ed.), Readerresponse criticism: From formalism to poststructuralism (pp. 134–163). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
 Borasi, R., & Siegel, M. (1990). Reading to learn mathematics: New connections, new questions, new challenges. For the Learning of Mathematics, 10(3), 9–16.
 Borasi, R., Siegel, M., Fonzi, J., & Smith, C. F. (1998). Using transactional reading strategies to support sensemaking and discussion in mathematics classrooms: An exploratory study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(3), 275–305. CrossRef
 Carter, T. A., & Dean, E. O. (2006). Mathematics intervention for grades 511: Teaching mathematics, reading, or both? Reading Psychology, 27(2 & 3), 127–146. CrossRef
 Eco, U. (1979). The role of the reader: Explorations in the semiotics of texts. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
 Erlwanger, S. H. (1973). Benny's conception of rules and answers in IPI mathematics. Journal of Children's Mathematical Behavior, 1(2), 7–26.
 Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French, and German classrooms: Who get an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567–590. CrossRef
 Henderson, C., & Rosenthal, A. (2006). Reading questions: Encouraging students to read the text before coming to class. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 46–50.
 HerbelEisenmann, B. A. (2004). An examination of textbook “voice”: How might discursive choices undermine some goals of the reform? In D. E. McDougall & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentysixth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 862–870) Toronto, ON.
 Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1994). The readingsciencelearningwriting connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 877–893. CrossRef
 HughesHallett, D., McCallum, W. G., Gleason, A. M., Osgood, B. G., Flath, D. E., Quinney, D., et al. (2009). Calculus: Single variable (5th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
 K12 Mathematics Curriculum Center. (2005). The changing mathematics curriculum: An annotated bibliography. Newton, MA: Education Development Center.
 Kang, W., & Kilpatrick, J. (1992). Didactic transposition in mathematics textbooks. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(1), 2–7.
 Konior, J. (1993). Research into the construction of mathematical texts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24(3), 251–256. CrossRef
 Kucan, L., & Beck, I. (1997). Thinking aloud and reading comprehension: Inquiry, instruction, and social interaction. Review of Educational Research, 67(3), 271–299.
 Link, H. (1976). Rezeptionsforschung: Eine einführung in methoden und probleme [Reception Research: An introduction to methods and problems]. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
 Lithner, J. (2003). Students' mathematical reasoning in university textbook exercises. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52, 29–55. CrossRef
 Love, E., & Pimm, D. (1996). ‘This is so’: A text on texts. In A. Bishops, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 371–409). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
 MarbachAd, G., & Sokolove, P. (2000). Undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 854–870. CrossRef
 McNamara, D. S., Kintsch, E., Songer, N. B., & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 1–43. CrossRef
 Morgan, C. (1996). “The language of mathematics”: Towards a critical analysis of mathematics texts. For the Learning of Mathematics, 16(3), 2–10.
 Neth, A., & Voigt, J. (1991). Lebensweltliche inszenierungen. Die aushandlung schulmathematischer bedeutungen an sachaufgaben [Realworld Role Plays: The negotiation of schoolrelated mathematical meanings through assigned tasks]. In H. Maier & J. Voigt (Eds.), Interpretative Unterrichtsforschung [Interpretative Pedagogy Research] (pp. 79–116). Köln: Aulis.
 Österholm, M. (2006). Characterizing reading comprehension of mathematical texts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3), 325–346. CrossRef
 Otte, M. (1983). Textual strategies. For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(3), 15–28.
 Raman, M. (2002). Coordinating informal and formal aspects of mathematics: Student behavior and textbook messages. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(2), 135–150. CrossRef
 Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Chavez, O. (2004). Why mathematics textbooks matter. Educational Leadership, 5(61), 61–66.
 Rezat, S. (2006). The structures of German mathematics textbooks. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 38(6), 482–487. CrossRef
 Rosenblatt, L. (1938). Literature as exploration. New York: AppletonCentury.
 Rosenblatt, L. (1985). Viewpoints: Transaction versus interaction—a terminological rescue operation. Research in the Teaching of English, 19(1), 96–107.
 Rotman, B. (2006). Toward a semiotics of mathematics. In R. Hersh (Ed.), Unconventional essays on the nature of mathematics (pp. 97–127). New York: Springer. CrossRef
 Schraw, G., & Bruning, R. (1999). How implicit models of reading affect motivation to read and reading engagement. Scientific Studies of Reading, 3(3), 281–302. CrossRef
 Siegel, M., Borasi, R., & Smith, C. (1989). A critical review of reading in mathematics instruction: The need for a new synthesis. Unpublished manuscript. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester. Retrieved June 25, 2008, from ERIC database (ED301863).
 Smith, F. (2004). Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read (6th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
 Stewart, J. (2007). Calculus (6th ed.). New York: BrooksCole.
 Stickles, P., & Stickles, J. (2008). Using reading assignments in teaching calculus. Mathematics and Computer Education, 42(1), 6–10.
 Voigt, J. (1994). Negotiation of mathematical meaning and learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2/3), 275–298. CrossRef
 Wandersee, J. (1988). Ways students read texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(1), 69–84. CrossRef
 Weber, K., Brophy, A., & Lin, K. (2008). Learning advanced mathematical concepts by reading text. Paper presented at Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, San Diego, CA. Retrieved August 7, 2008, from http://cresmet.asu.edu/crume2008/Proceedings/Weber%20LONG.pdf.
 Weinberg, A. (2010). The implied reader in calculus textbooks. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (in press).
 Weinberg, A., Wiesner, E., Benesh, B., & Boester, T. (2010). Undergraduate students' selfreported use of mathematics textbooks. Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies (in press).
 Wilson, W. D. (1981). Readers in texts. PMLA, 96(5), 848–863. CrossRef
 Wolff, E. (1971). Der intendierte leser [The Intended Reader]. Poetica, 4, 140–146.
 Yore, L. D. (2000). Enhancing science literacy for all students with embedded reading instruction and writingtolearn activities. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(1), 105–112. CrossRef
 Title
 Understanding mathematics textbooks through readeroriented theory
 Journal

Educational Studies in Mathematics
Volume 76, Issue 1 , pp 4963
 Cover Date
 20110101
 DOI
 10.1007/s1064901092643
 Print ISSN
 00131954
 Online ISSN
 15730816
 Publisher
 Springer Netherlands
 Additional Links
 Topics
 Keywords

 Mathematics education
 Content area reading
 Readeroriented theory
 Textbooks
 Industry Sectors
 Authors

 Aaron Weinberg ^{(1)}
 Emilie Wiesner ^{(1)}
 Author Affiliations

 1. Ithaca College, 953 Danby Rd, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA