Advertisement

Blurred lines: producing the mathematics student through discourses of special educational needs in the context of reform mathematics in Chile

  • Lisa DarraghEmail author
  • Luz Valoyes-Chávez
Article

Abstract

Are students with special educational needs excluded from the reform promise of “mathematics for all”? This paper explores the discursive production of students with special educational needs in the context of professional development (PD) for collaborative problem-solving teaching. We held interviews with Chilean primary school teachers after their participation in PD and used a post-structural analysis to examine them. We turned to policy and institutional practices to understand the disability discourses that were evident. Teachers called on medical and deficit discourses to produce these students as abnormal and problematic in their learning of mathematics. Yet teachers also blurred the lines of categorisation between and within labels of special needs, including other students in these terms. Simultaneously, the reform PD created space for a counter discourse of ability. We suggest PD should help teachers of mathematics resist deficit discourses and see the ways in which experience may run contrary to them.

Keywords

Special needs Disability Inclusion Exclusion Discourse Reform Problem-solving mathematics 

Notes

Funding information

The research reported in this paper was made possible by funding from the following funding sources: CONICYT/ FONDECYT No. 3160469 and No. 3180238, and PIA-CONICYT Basal Funds for Centers of Excellence Project FB0003.

References

  1. Althusser, L. (1971). Ideology and ideological state apparatus. In S. Zizek (Ed.), Ideología. Un mapa de la cuestión (pp. 115–155). Buenos Aires, Argentina: Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar
  2. Avalos, B., & de Los Rios, D. (2013). Reform environment and teacher identity in Chile. In D. B. Napier & S. Majhanovich (Eds.), Education, dominance and identity (pp. 153–175). Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Bagger, A., & Roos, H. (2015). How research conceptualises the student in need of special education in mathematics. In MADIF9: The ninth Swedish mathematics education research seminar (pp. 27–36). Umea, Sweden: Svensk forening for Matematik Didaktisk Forskinin-SMDF.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. J. (2013). Foucault, power, and education. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baxter, J., Woodward, J., Voorhies, J., & Wong, J. (2002). We talk about it, but do they get it? Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 17(3), 173–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Borgioli, G. M. (2008). A critical examination of learning disabilities in mathematics: Applying the lens of ableism. Journal of Thought, 43(1–2), 131–147.  https://doi.org/10.2307/jthought.43.1-2.131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bottge, B. A., Rueda, E., Serlin, R. C., Hung, Y.-H., & Kwon, J. M. (2007). Shrinking achievement differences with anchored math problems: Challenges and possibilities. The Journal of Special Education, 41(1), 31–49.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669070410010301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boyd, B., & Bargerhuff, M. E. (2009). Mathematics education and special education. Mathematics Teacher Education & Development, 11, 54–67.Google Scholar
  9. Brantlinger, E. (2004). Confounding the needs and confronting the norms: An extension of Reid and Valle’s essay. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 490–499.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carnine, D. (1997). Instructional design in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(2), 130–141.  https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949703000201 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cerda, G., Pérez, C., Giaconi, V., Perdomo-Díaz, J., Reyes, C., & Felmer, P. (2017). The effect of a professional development program workshop about problem solving on mathematics teachers’ ideas about the nature of mathematics, achievements in mathematics, and learning in mathematics. Psychology, Society, & Education, 9(1), 11–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Connor, D. (2013). Who “owns” dis/ability? The cultural work of critical special educators as insider-outsiders. Theory and Research in Social Education, 41(4), 494–513.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2013.838741 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Connor, D. J., Gabel, S. L., Gallagher, D. J., & Morton, M. (2008). Disability studies and inclusive education—Implications for theory, research, and practice. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(5–6), 441–457.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110802377482 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Darragh, L. (2019). Interrogating deficit views: Students and teachers of mathematics in reform contexts. Paper presented at Mathematics Education and Society Conference, MES10: Hyderabad, India.Google Scholar
  15. Espinoza, C. G., Darragh, L., & Peri, A. (2016). Oportunidades para mejorar la calidad de las clases en matemáticas. In S. Estrella, M. Goizueta, C. Guerrero, A. Mena, J. Mena, E. Montoya, A. Morales, M. Parranguez, E. Ramos (Eds.), XX Jornadas Nacionales de Educación Matemática (pp. 359–363). Valparaíso, Chile.Google Scholar
  16. Felmer, P., & Perdomo-Díaz, J. (2017). Un programa de desarrollo profesional docente para un currículo de matemática centrado en las habilidades: La resolución de problemas como eje articulador. Revista Educación Matemática, 29(1), 201–217.  https://doi.org/10.24844/em2901.08 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foote, M. Q., & Lambert, R. (2011). I have a solution to share: Learning through equitable participation in a mathematics classroom. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 11(3), 247–260.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2011.595882 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Foucault, M. (1972). The archeology of knowledge. New York, NY: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  19. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. In H. Dreyfus & P. Rabinow (Eds.), Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 208–226). Brighton, UK: Harvester.Google Scholar
  20. Gervasoni, A., & Lindenskov, L. (2011). Students with “special rights” for mathematics education. In B. Atweh, M. Graven, W. Secada, & P. Valero (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 307–323). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Healy, L., & Powell, A. B. (2012). Understanding and overcoming “disadvantage” in learning mathematics. In Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 69–100). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2013). The co-construction of learning difficulties in mathematics-teacher-student interactions and their role in the development of a disabled mathematical identity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 341–368.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9457-z
  23. Hudson, P., Miller, S. P., & Butler, F. (2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 19–32.Google Scholar
  24. Infante, M., Matus, C., & Vizcarra, R. (2011). Razonando sobre la idea de diferencia en las políticas educativas chilenas. Universum, 26(2), 143–163.  https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-23762011000200008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs. Remedial and Special Education, 24(2), 97–114.  https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325030240020501 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lambert, R. (2015). Constructing and resisting disability in mathematics classrooms: A case study exploring the impact of different pedagogies. Educational Studies in Mathematics Education, 89, 1–18.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-014-9587-6
  27. Lambert, R., & Tan, P. (2017). Conceptualizations of students with and without disabilities as mathematical problem solvers in educational research: A critical review. Education Sciences, 7, 51.  https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7020051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leyva, L. (2016). An intersectional analysis of Latin@ college women’s counter-stories in mathematics. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 9(2), 81–121.Google Scholar
  29. Lundin, S. (2012). Hating school, loving mathematics: On the ideological function of critique and reform in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 73–85.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9366-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marcone, R., & Atweh, B. (2015). A meta-research question about the lack of research in mathematics education concerning students with physical disability. In Proceedings of the Eighth Mathematics Education and Society Conference. Portland, OR: MES8Google Scholar
  31. Matus, C., & Rojas, C. (2015). Normalidad y diferencia en nuestras escuelas: A propósito de la Ley de Inclusión Escolar. Revista Docencia, 56, 47–56.Google Scholar
  32. McDermott, R., Goldman, S., & Varenne, H. (2006). The cultural work of learning disabilities. Educational Researcher, 35, 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. MINEDUC. (2009). Decreto con toma de razón No 0170 Fija Normas para determinar alumnos con necesidades educativas especiales que serán beneficiarios de las subvenciones para Educación Especial. Chile, 2009. Retrieved from https://especial.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2018/06/DTO-170_21-ABR-2010.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2019.
  34. MINEDUC. (2012). Bases curriculares 2012. Educación Básica Matemática. Santiago, Chile: Ministerio de Educación, República de Chile. Retrieved from http://www.curriculumenlineamineduc.cl/605/articles-21321_programa.pdf. Accessed 14 Jan 2019.
  35. O’Connor, C., & De Luca Fernandez, S. (2006). Race, class, and disproportionality: Reevaluating the relationship between poverty and special education placement. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 6–11.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X035006006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Peña, M. (2013). Análisis crítico de discurso del Decreto 170 de Subvención Diferenciada para Necesidades Educativas Especiales: El diagnóstico como herramienta de gestión. Individuo y Sociedad, 12(2), 93–103.Google Scholar
  37. Popkewitz, T. S., & Brenna, M. (1998). Restructuring of social and political theory in education: Foucault and a social epistemology of school practices. In T. S. Popkewitz & M. Brenna (Eds.), Foucault’s challenge. Discourse, knowledge and power in Education (pp. 3–35). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  38. Reid, D. K., & Valle, J. W. (2004). The discursive practice of learning disability: Implications for instruction and parent-school relations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 466–481.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rouleau A., Ruiz N., Reyes C., & Liljedahl P. (2019). Examining sources of self-efficacy in whole-class problem solving. In P. Felmer, B. Koichu, & P. Liljedahl (Eds.) Problem solving in mathematics instruction and teacher professional development. Springer. (in press).Google Scholar
  40. Sánchez Bravo, A., Díaz Flores, C., Sanhueza Henríquez, S., & Friz Carrillo, M. (2008). Percepciones y actitudes de los estudiantes de pedagogía hacia la inclusión educativa. Estudios Pedagógicos, XXXIV(2), 169–178.  https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07052008000200010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Scherer, P., Beswick, K., DeBlois, L., Healy, L., & Moser Opitz, E. (2016). Assistance of students with mathematical learning difficulties: How can research support practice? ZDM Mathematics Education, 48(5), 633–649.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0800-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Straehler-Pohl, H., Gellert, U., Fernandez, S., & Figueiras, L. (2014). School mathematics registers in a context of low academic expectations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(2), 175–199.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9503-5
  43. Tenorio Eitel, S. (2005). La integración escolar en Chile: Perspectiva de los docentes sobre su implementación. Reice. Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 3(1), 823–831.Google Scholar
  44. Tremain, S. (2006). On the government of disability. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (pp. 185–196). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. UNESCO. (1994). The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Salamanca, Spain: Ministry of Education and Science Spain. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF. Accessed 14 Jan 2019.
  46. Valoyes-Chávez, L. (2017). Inequidades raciales y educación matemática. Revista Colombiana de Educación, (73), 127–150.  https://doi.org/10.17227/01203916.73rce127.150
  47. Valoyes-Chávez, L. (2018). On the making of a new mathematics teacher: Professional development, subjectivation, and resistance to change. Educational Studies in Mathematics, Advanced online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9869-5
  48. Weir, L. (2008). The concept of truth regime. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 33(2), 367–389.Google Scholar
  49. Yolcu, A., & Popkewitz, T. (2018). Making the able body: School mathematics as a cultural practice. ZDM Mathematics Education. Advance online publication  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-1003-8

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Centro de Investigación Avanzada en Educación (CIAE)Universidad de ChileSantiagoChile

Personalised recommendations