Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 93, Issue 1, pp 87–103 | Cite as

Growing-making mathematics: a dynamic perspective on people, materials, and movement in classrooms

Article

Abstract

Recent theoretical advances on learning (mathematics) emphasize the fact that what results from engagement with curriculum materials is not entirely in the control of the students in the way classical theories of knowing and learning suggest. These new theories distinguish themselves by either invoking distributed agency, some of which is attributed to non-human aspects of the environment, or by emphasizing the essential (radical) passivity that characterizes coming to know. In this study, an alternative is offered: making as a modality of growing. This move allows us to capture theoretically that both growers-makers and their materials grow (old) together. The proposed approach troubles existing ones because it shifts our perspective from a transitive relation between students and the curricular objects to an intransitive one, where the becoming of each is described in terms of Deleuzian lines of flight. A case study involving two girls and tangram pieces is described in terms of growing together and becoming-hexagon. Implications are discussed for how researchers can capture the non-agential, non-causal dimensions of coming to know.

Keywords

Transitivity Intransitivity Materialism Flow Deleuze 

References

  1. Châtelet, G. (1993). Les enjeux du mobile: Mathématique, physique, philosophie [The stakes of movement: Mathematics, physics, philosophy]. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  2. de Freitas, E. (2012). The classroom as rhizome: New strategies for diagramming knotted interactions. Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 557–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2012). Diagram, gesture, agency: Theorizing embodiment in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2013). New materialist ontologies in mathematics education: The body in/of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1980). Mille plateaux: Capitalisme et schizophrénie [A thousand plateaus: Capital and schizophrenia]. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar
  7. Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  8. Husserl, E. (1976). Husserliana Band VI. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie [Husserliana vol. 6: The crisis of the European sciences and transcendental phenomenology. An introduction to phenomenological philosophy]. The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  9. Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ingold, T. (2011). Being-alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archeology, art and architecture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Ingold, T. (2015). The life of lines. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of imagination, reason, and meaning. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Kieren, T., & Simmt, E. (2009). Response to Fazio and Gallagher: Brought forth in bringing forth. The inter-actions and products of a collective learning system. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 6(2), 20–28.Google Scholar
  15. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Livingston, E. (2008). Ethnographies of reason. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1978). Werke Band 3 [Works vol. 3]. Berlin: Dietz.Google Scholar
  18. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1983). Werke Band 42 [Works vol. 42]. Berlin: Dietz.Google Scholar
  19. McDermott, R. P., Gospodinoff, K., & Aron, J. (1978). Criteria for an ethnographically adequate description of concerted activities and their contexts. Semiotica, 24, 245–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mol, A., & Law, J. (1994). Regions, networks and fluids: Anemia and social topology. Social Studies of Science, 24, 641–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rasmussen, C., Wawro, M., & Zandieh, M. (2015). Examining individual and collective mathematical progress. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 259–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reid, D. A. (2014). The coherence of enactivism and mathematics education research: A case study. Avant, 5(2), 137–172.Google Scholar
  23. Proulx, J. (2013). Mental mathematics, emergence of strategies, and the enactivist theory of cognition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roth, W.-M., & Maheux, J.-F. (2015a). The stakes of movement: A dynamic approach to mathematical thinking. Curriculum Inquiry, 45, 266–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Roth, W.-M., & Maheux, J.-F. (2015b). The visible and the invisible: The immanence of doing mathematics and mathematics as revelation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88, 221–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Making mathematics and making pasta: From cookbook procedures to really cooking. In J. G. Greeno & S. V. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 299–319). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  27. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2009). The corporeal turn: An interdisciplinary reader. Exeter: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  28. Sheets-Johnstone, M. (2011). The primacy of movement: Expanded second edition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sinclair, N., de Freitas, E., & Ferrara, F. (2013). Virtual encounters: The murky and furtive world of mathematical inventiveness. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45, 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Thompson, P. W. (2015). Researching mathematical meanings for teaching. In L. D. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Third handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 968–1002). New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  31. Turnbull, D. (1993). The ad hoc collective work of building gothic cathedrals with templates, string, and geometry. Science, Technology & Human Values, 18, 315–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80, 121–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol. 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations