Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 94, Issue 1, pp 21–36 | Cite as

Agency and assemblage in pattern generalisation: a materialist approach to learning

Article

Abstract

In this paper, we draw on the contemporary perspective of inclusive materialism offered by de Freitas and Sinclair to contribute to current discussions on the role of the body in the learning of mathematics. Using the notions of distributed agency and assemblage, we illustrate the way in which three students engage with a patterning task. We discuss this as an example to show how the mathematics activity involves, besides the students’ bodies, other materialities that populate the classroom, and how all the human and non-human bodies form a moving assemblage that constantly reconfigures and reorients learning. The inclusive materialism helps us talk about learning as a dynamic assemblage rather than in terms of individual achievements and directs attention to the material learning environment.

Keywords

Assemblage Agency Body Generalisation Inclusive materialism Pattern 

References

  1. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: How matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, J. & Rivera, F. (Eds.). (2008). Generalization in algebra: The foundation of algebraic thinking and reasoning across the grades. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(1), 1.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Carraher, D., Martinez, M., & Schliemann, A. (2008). Early algebra and mathematical generalization. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Châtelet, G. (2000). Figuring space: Philosophy, mathematics and physics (R. Shore & M. Zagha, Trans.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2012). Diagram, gesture, agency: Theorizing embodiment in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 133–152.Google Scholar
  7. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2013). New materialist ontologies in mathematics education: The body in/of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(3), 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Delanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  10. Deleuze, G. (1994/1968). Difference and repetition (P. Patton, Ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ferrara, F., & Sinclair, N. (2016). An early algebra approach to pattern generalisation: Actualising the virtual through words, gestures and toilet paper. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 92(1), 1–19.Google Scholar
  13. Haraway, D. J. (2008). When species meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  14. Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  15. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1992). The tree of knowledge: The biological roots of human understanding (Revised Ed.). Boston: Shambhala.Google Scholar
  17. Ministry of Instruction, University and Research (MIUR). (2012). Indicazioni nazionali per il curricolo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo di istruzione. Roma: MIUR.Google Scholar
  18. Moss, J., & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building and knowledge forum: Grade 4 students collaborate to solve linear generalizing problems. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehlíková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 193–199). Prague: PME.Google Scholar
  19. Moss, J., & Beatty, R. (2010). Knowledge building and mathematics: Shifting the responsibility for knowledge advancement and engagement. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36(1), 22–54.Google Scholar
  20. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Ruddock, G. J., O’Sullivan, C. Y., & Preuschoff, C. (Eds.). (2009). TIMSS 2011 Assessment Frameworks. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
  21. Radford, L. (2010a). Elementary forms of algebraic thinking in young students. In M.F. Pinto & T.F. Kawasaki (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 73–80). Belo Horizonte: PME.Google Scholar
  22. Radford, L. (2010b). The eye as a theoretician: Seeing structures in generalizing activities. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30(2), 2–7.Google Scholar
  23. Rivera, F. D. (2011). Toward a visually-oriented school mathematics curriculum. Research, theory, practice, and issues. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roth, W.-M. (2010). Incarnation: Radicalizing the embodiment of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30(2), 8–17.Google Scholar
  25. Rotman, B. (2008). Becoming beside ourselves: The alphabet, ghosts, and distributed human beings. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stylianides, A. J., & Stylianides, G. J. (2013). Seeking research-grounded solutions to problems of practice: Classroom-based interventions in mathematics education. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(3), 333–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Università di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations