Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 91, Issue 2, pp 227–246 | Cite as

A critical discourse analysis of practical problems in a foundation mathematics course at a South African university

  • Kate le RouxEmail author
  • Jill Adler


Mathematical problems that make links to the everyday and to disciplines other than mathematics—variously referred to as practical, realistic, real-world or applied problems in the literature—feature in school and undergraduate mathematics reforms aimed at increasing mathematics participation in contexts of inequity and diversity. In this article, we present a micro- and macro-analysis of a prototypical practical problem in an undergraduate mathematics course at a South African university. This course offers an alternative route to a mathematics major for students considered disadvantaged by enduring educational inequalities in South Africa. Using a socio-political practice perspective on mathematics and critical discourse analysis—drawn from Norman Fairclough’s critical linguists—we describe what mathematics and mathematical identities practical problems make available to students and compare this to what is valued in school mathematics and other university mathematics courses. Our analysis shows that these practical problems draw in complex ways on sometimes contradictory practices in the wider context, requiring the student to work flexibly with the movement of meaning within and across texts. We raise for further consideration the possible consequences of this complexity and offer suggestions for practice that take into account issues of power.


Access Advanced mathematics Calculus reform Critical discourse analysis Equity Practical problems Socio-political practice perspective 



We thank Lucia Thesen for her insightful comments, and reviewers whose feedback has enhanced the clarity. This study has been supported by the National Research Foundation in South Africa under Grant number TTK2006040500009. Any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors, and the National Research Foundation does not accept any liability in regard thereto.


  1. Bansilal, S. (2009). The use of real life contexts in the CTA: Some unintended consequences. Pythagoras, 69, 17–27.Google Scholar
  2. Bergsten, C., Jablonka, E., & Klisinska, A. (2010). Reproduction and distribution of mathematical knowledge in higher education: Constructing insiders and outsiders. In U. Gellert, E. Jablonka, & C. Morgan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Mathematics Education and Society Conference (pp. 150–160). Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
  3. Boaler, J. (1993). Encouraging transfer of “school” mathematics to the “real world” through interpretation of process and content, context and culture. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25, 341–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, B., & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing children’s mathematical knowledge: Social class, sex and problem-solving. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Council on Higher Education (2013). A proposal for undergraduate curriculum reform in South Africa: The case for a flexible curriculum structure (Discussion document). Pretoria: Council on Higher Education. Retrieved from
  7. De Freitas, E., & Zolkower, B. (2009). Using social semiotics to prepare mathematics teachers to teach for social justice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12, 187–302.Google Scholar
  8. Department of Basic Education. (2011). National Curriculum Statement Grades 10–12 Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement: Mathematics, Grade 10–12. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education.Google Scholar
  9. Department of Education. (2003). National Curriculum Statement Grades 10–12 (General): Mathematics. Pretoria: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  10. Douglas, R. G. (1986). Introduction: Steps toward a lean and lively calculus. In R. G. Douglas (Ed.), Toward a lean and lively calculus (pp. iv–vi). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar
  11. Dowling, P. (1998). The sociology of mathematics education: Mathematical myths/pedagogic texts. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dreyfus, T. (1991). Advanced mathematical thinking processes. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 25–41). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  13. Engelbrecht, J., Harding, A., & Phiri, P. (2010). Are OBE‐trained learners ready for university mathematics? Pythagoras, 72, 3–13.Google Scholar
  14. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  15. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power (2nd ed.). Harlow, England: Longman.Google Scholar
  16. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis in social research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Fairclough, N. (2005). Peripheral vision: Discourse analysis in organization studies—the case for critical realism. Organization Studies, 26, 915–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson.Google Scholar
  19. Garner, B. E., & Garner, L. E. (2001). Retention of concepts and skills in traditional and reformed applied calculus. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 13(3), 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gellert, U., & Jablonka, E. (2009). “I am not talking about reality”: Word problems and the intricacies of producing legitimate text. In L. Verschaffel, B. Greer, W. Van Dooren, & S. Mukhopadhyay (Eds.), Words and worlds: Modelling verbal descriptions of situations (pp. 39–53). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  21. Gerofsky, S. (2004). A man left Albuquerque heading east: Word problems as genre in mathematics education. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  22. Gray, E. M., & Tall, D. O. (1994). Duality, ambiguity, and flexibility: A “perceptual” view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 116–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Harel, G., & Kaput, J. (1991). The role of conceptual entities and their symbols in building advanced mathematical concepts. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 82–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  24. Hazzan, O. (2003). How students attempt to reduce abstraction in the learning of mathematics and the learning of computer science. Computer Science Education, 13(2), 95–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: Examining the “voice” of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 344–369.Google Scholar
  26. Hoyles, C., Newman, K., & Noss, R. (2001). Changing patterns of transition from school to university mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 32, 829–845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hughes-Hallet, D., Gleason, A. M., Flath, D. E., Gordon, S. P., Lomen, D. O., Lovelock, D., et al. (1994). Calculus. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  28. Jablonka, E., Ashjari, H., & Bergsten, C. (2012). Recognising knowledge criteria in undergraduate mathematics education. In C. Bergsten, E. Jablonka, & M. Ramon (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth Swedish Mathematics Education Research Seminar (pp. 101–110). Linköping: Swedish Society for Research in Mathematics Education.Google Scholar
  29. Janks, H. (2010). Literacy and power. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Kanes, C., Morgan, C., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2014). The PISA mathematics regime: Knowledge structures and practices of the self. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87, 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kessi, S. (2013, second quarter). Transforming historically white universities: Students and the politics of racial representation. New Agenda, 53–55.Google Scholar
  32. Le Roux, C.J. (2011). A critical examination of the use of practical problems and a learner-centred pedagogy in a foundational undergraduate mathematics course (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
  33. Le Roux, K., & Adler, J. (2012). Talking and looking structurally and operationally as ways of acting in a socio-political mathematical practice. In T.Y. Tso (Ed.), Proceedings of the 36th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 51–58). Taipei: PME.Google Scholar
  34. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 454–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maharaj, A. (2010). Students’ understanding of the concept of a limit of a function. Pythagoras, 71, 41–52.Google Scholar
  36. McBride, M. (1994). The theme of individualism in mathematics education: An examination of mathematics textbooks. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(3), 36–42.Google Scholar
  37. Morgan, C. (1998). Writing mathematically: The discourse of investigation. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  38. Morgan, C. (2014). Understanding practices in mathematics education: Structure and text. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 87, 129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Moschkovich, J. (2002). An introduction to examining everyday and academic mathematics practices. In M. E. Brenner & J. Moschkovich (Eds.), Everyday and academic mathematics classrooms (pp. 1–11). Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  40. Nyabanyaba, T. (2002). Examining examination: The ordinary level (O-level) mathematics examination in Lesotho and the impact of recent trends on Basotho students’ epistemological access (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
  41. O’Halloran, K. (2011). The semantic hyperspace: Accumulating mathematical knowledge across semiotic resources and modalities. In F. Christie & K. Maton (Eds.), Disciplinarity: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives (pp. 217–236). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  42. Raman, M. (2002). Coordinating informal and formal aspects of mathematics: Student behaviour and textbook messages. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1995). A brief biography of calculus reform. Undergraduate Mathematics Education (UME) Trends, 6(6), 3–5. Retrieved from
  44. Schwingendorf, K.E., & Dubinsky, E. (1990). Calculus, concepts, and computers: Innovations in learning. In W. C. Tucker (Ed.), Priming the calculus pump: Innovations and resources, MAA Notes 17 (pp. 175–198). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar
  45. Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.Google Scholar
  46. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smith, J. P., III, & Star, J. R. (2007). Expanding the notion of impact of K-12 Standards-based mathematics and reform calculus programmes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 3–34.Google Scholar
  48. Soudien, C. (2008). The intersection of race and class in the South African university: Student experiences. South African Journal of Higher Education, 22, 662–678.Google Scholar
  49. Spaull, N. (2013). South Africa’s education crisis: The quality of education in South Africa 1994–2011 (Report commissioned by the Centre for Development Enterprise). Retrieved from
  50. Stewart, J. (2006). Calculus: Concepts and contexts (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  51. Straehler-Pohl, H., Fernández, S., Gellert, U., & Figueras, L. (2014). School mathematics registers in a context of low academic expectations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85, 175–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Swanson, D. M. (2005). School mathematics: Discourse and the politics of context. In A. Chronaki & I. M. Christiansen (Eds.), Challenging perspectives on mathematics classroom communication (pp. 261–294). Greenwich, England: Information Age.Google Scholar
  53. Tall, D. (1992). The transition to advanced mathematical thinking: Functions, limits, infinity and proof. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 495–511). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  54. Tall, D. (1996). Functions and calculus. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 289–325). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  55. Tall, D. (1997). From school to university: The effects of learning styles in the transition from elementary to advanced mathematical thinking. In M. O. J. Thomas (Ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Australasian Bridging Network Mathematics Conference (pp. 9–26). New Zealand: University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  56. Tobias, B. (2009). From textual problems to mathematical relationships: Case studies of secondary school students and the discourses at play in interpreting word problems (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Johannesburg, South Africa: University of the Witwatersrand.Google Scholar
  57. Valero, P. (2007). A socio-political look at equity in the school organization of mathematics education. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik (ZDM), 39, 225–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wagner, D. (2012). Opening mathematics texts: Resisting the seduction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Walkerdine, V. (1988). The mastery of reason: Cognitive development and the production of rationality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Wood, L. N. (2001). The secondary-tertiary interface. In D. Holton (Ed.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: An ICMI study (pp. 87–98). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Academic Development ProgrammeUniversity of Cape TownRondeboschSouth Africa
  2. 2.School of EducationUniversity of the WitwatersrandWits, JohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations