Abstract
Exploring language provides us with one approach to better understanding the practices and beliefs of a community. With advances in technology—specifically, computational text processing and machine learning tools—we can now examine written language on a large scale. In this study, we investigate the language of mathematics teaching and learning in the USA over a decade (2009–2018) by analyzing text from articles published in Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School. Our analyses explore the terminology used by middle school teachers and teacher educators to discuss their practice, revealing terms that are used widely, terms that have largely been absent from such writing, and terms that have shifted in usage over the past decade. This research provides insight into the zeitgeist of mathematics teaching and learning during a particular period of time, while also suggesting a fruitful approach to examining language as a means of uncovering the beliefs and practices of a community.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The authors will share the corpus used for this study upon request.
Notes
Note that Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School is no longer an active journal, as NCTM combined its three grade band-specific journals to produce one journal for teachers entitled Mathematics Teacher: Teaching and Learning PK-12.
Given the larger number of possible appearances of many single words (as compared with two-word terms), we increase the frequency threshold for this analysis to 250. It is worth noting that only five of the previously explored noun phrases would meet that threshold.
We selected the number of clusters based on examination of average silhouette scores for each candidate clustering (Thinsungnoen, Kaoungku, Durongdumronchai, Kerdprasop, & Kerdprasop, 2015).
Given the shape of this curve, fitting a linear function is likely not appropriate.
References
Aguirre, J., Mayfield-Ingram, K., & Martin, D. (2013). The impact of identity in K-8 mathematics: Rethinking equity-based practices. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Au, W. (2016). Meritocracy 2.0: High-stakes, standardized testing as a racial project of neoliberal multiculturalism. Educational Policy, 30(1), 39–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904815614916
Austin, J. L., & Howson, A. G. (1979). Language and mathematical education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 10(2), 161–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00230986
Bartell, T. G. (2013). Learning to teach mathematics for social justice: Negotiating social justice and mathematical goals. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 129–163.
Barwell, R., Clarkson, P., Halai, A., Kazima, M., Moschkovich, J., Planas, N., … Ubillús, M. V. (Eds.). (2015). Mathematics education and language diversity: The 21st ICMI study. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Bird, S., Klein, E., & Loper, E. (2009). Natural language processing with Python: Analyzing text with the natural language toolkit. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media, Inc.
Bruce, C. D., Davis, B., Sinclair, N., McGarvey, L., Hallowell, D., Drefs, M., … Woolcott, G. (2017). Understanding gaps in research networks: Using “spatial reasoning” as a window into the importance of networked educational research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9743-2
Bullock, E. C. (2013). Conducting “good” equity research in mathematics education: A question of methodology. Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College, 3(2), 30–36.
Bullock, E. C. (2015). Maintaining standards: A Foucauldian historical analysis of the NCTM standards movement. In S. Mukhopadhyay & B. Greer (Eds.), Proceedings of the eighth international mathematics education and society conference (Vol. 2, pp. 369–382). Oregon: MES8.
Bullock, E. C. (2019). Mathematics curriculum reform as racial remediation: A historical counter-story. In Critical race theory in mathematics education (pp. 75–97). New York, NY: Routledge.
Carroll, J. M. (1980). Naming and describing in social communication. Language and Speech, 23(4), 309–322.
Castagno, A. E. (2014). Educated in whiteness: Good intentions and diversity in schools. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Dobie, T. E., Sherin, M., & White, S. (2021). A lexical snapshot: An investigation into the evolving terminology of middle school mathematics teachers in the United States. In C. Mesiti, M. Artigue, H. Hollingsworth, Y. Cao, & D. J. Clarke (Eds.), Teachers talking about their classrooms: Learning from the professional lexicons of mathematics teachers around the world. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dobie, T. E., Sherin, M., White, S., & Mayle, K. (2021). United States Lexicon. In C. Mesiti, M. Artigue, H. Hollingsworth, Y. Cao, & D. J. Clarke (Eds.), Teachers talking about their classrooms: Learning from the professional lexicons of mathematics teachers around the world. New York: Routledge.
Dossey, J., Halvorsen, K., & McCrone, S. (2008). Mathematics education in the United States 2008: A capsule summary fact book written for the Eleventh International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-11). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Dossey, J. A., McCrone, S., & Halvorsen, K. (2016). Mathematics education in the United States 2016: A capsule summary fact book. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Ermeling, B. A. (2010). Tracing the effects of teacher inquiry on classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(3), 377–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.019
Gates, P., & Jorgensen, R. (2009). Foregrounding social justice in mathematics teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 12(3), 161–170.
Golden, N. A. (2017). “There’s still that window that’s open”: The problem with “grit”. Urban Education, 52(3), 343–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085915613557
Grossman, P., & McDonald, M. (2008). Back to the future: Directions for research in teaching and teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 184–205.
Gutiérrez, R. (2012). Context matters: How should we conceptualize equity in mathematics education? In B. Herbel-Eisenmann, J. Choppin, D. Wagner, & D. Pimm (Eds.), Equity in discourse for mathematics education: Theories, practice, and policies (Vol. 55, pp. 17–33). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media.
Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Choppin, J., Wagner, D., & Pimm, D. (Eds.). (2011). Equity in discourse for mathematics education: Theories, practices, and policies (Vol. 55). Dordrecht: Springer Science & Business Media.
Hussein, B. A.S. (2012). The sapir-whorf hypothesis today. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(3), 642–646.
Kaur, J., & Gupta, V. (2010). Effective approaches for extraction of keywords. International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI), 7(6), 144.
Kilpatrick, J. (2014). Mathematics education in the United States and Canada. In A. Karp & G. Schubring (Eds.), Handbook on the history of mathematics education (pp. 323–334). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9155-2_16
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Langer-Osuna, J. M. (2018). Exploring the central role of student authority relations in collaborative mathematics. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 50(6), 1077–1087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0965-x
Leonard, J., Brooks, W., Barnes-Johnson, J., & Berry III, R. Q. (2010). The nuances and complexities of teaching mathematics for cultural relevance and social justice. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 261–270.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Love, B. L. (2019). We want to do more than survive: Abolitionist teaching and the pursuit of educational freedom. Boston, NJ: Beacon Press.
Martin, D. B. (2009). Researching race in mathematics education. The Teachers College Record, 111(2), 295–338.
Martin, D. B. (2010). Mathematics teaching, learning, and liberation in the lives of Black children. New York, NY: Routledge.
McClain, K., & Cobb, P. (1998). The role of imagery and discourse in supporting students’ mathematical development. In M. Lampert & M.L. Blunk (Eds.), Talking mathematics in school: Studies of teaching and learning (pp. 56–81). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
McLaughlin, M. W., & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Building school-based teacher learning communities: Professional strategies to improve student achievement (Vol. 45). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Mesiti, C., Artigue, M., Hollingsworth, H., Cao, Y., & Clarke, D. J. (Eds.). (2021). Teachers talking about their classrooms: Learning from the professional lexicons of mathematics teachers around the world. New York, NY: Routledge.
Milewski, A., & Strickland, S. (2016). (Toward) developing a common language for describing instructional practices of responding: A teacher-generated framework. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 4(2), 126–144.
Morgan, C., Craig, T., Schütte, M., & Wagner, D. (Eds.). (2014). Language and communication in mathematics education [Special issue]. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 46(6), 843–853.
Morgan, C. (1996). “The language of mathematics”: Towards a critical analysis of mathematics texts. For the Learning of Mathematics, 16(3), 2–10.
Moschkovich, J. (2002). A situated and sociocultural perspective on bilingual mathematics learners. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2–3), 189–212.
Moschkovich, J. (2007). Using two languages when learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(2), 121–144.
Moschkovich, J. N. (Ed.). (2010). Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Moschkovich, J. N., Wagner, D., Bose, A., & Mendes, J. R. (2018). In M. Schütte (Ed.), Language and communication in mathematics Education: International Perspectives. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75055-2
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics (6th ed.). Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014a). Access and Equity in Mathematics Education: A Position of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/PositionStatements/Access-and-Equity-in-Mathematics-Education/
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014b). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards in mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.
Pdfminer.six. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2020, from https://github.com/pdfminer/pdfminer.six
Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., et al. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12(Oct), 2825–2830.
Planas, N., & Schütte, M. (Eds.). (2018). Research frameworks for the study of language in mathematics education [Special issue]. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 50(6), 965–974.
Pollock, M. (2017). Schooltalk: Rethinking what we say about and to students every day. New York, NY: The New Press.
Riccomini, P. J., Smith, G. W., Hughes, E. M., & Fries, K. M. (2015). The language of mathematics: The importance of teaching and learning mathematical vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31(3), 235–252.
Richardson, L. (2007) Beautiful soup documentation. https://www.crummy.com/software/BeautifulSoup/bs4/doc/. Accessed February 9, 2021
Sapir, E. (1958). The status of linguistics as a science. In D. G. Mandelbaum (Ed.), Selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture and personality (pp. 160–166). Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17883.x
Setati, M., & Adler, J. (2000). Between languages and discourses: Language practices in primary multilingual mathematics classrooms in South Africa. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43(3), 243–269. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011996002062
Sfard, A. (2003). There is more to discourse than meets the ears: Looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning. In C. Kieran, E. Forman, & A. Sfard (Eds.), Learning discourse: Discursive approaches to research in mathematics education (pp. 13–57). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48085-9_1
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sfard, A. (2013). Almost 20 years after: Developments in research on language and mathematics. [Review of the book language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research, by J. N. Moschkovich (Ed.)]. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(2), 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9446-2
Sherin, B., Kersting, N., & Berland, M. (2018). Learning Analytics in Support of Qualitative Analysis. In Kay, J. and Luckin, R. (Eds.) Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age: Making the Learning Sciences Count, 13th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2018 (Vol. 1). London, UK: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Stinson, D. W., Wager, A., & Leonard, J. (2012). Teaching mathematics for social justice: Conversations with educators. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Tatsis, K., Wagner, D., & Maj-Tatsis, B. (2018). Authority and politeness theories: Conflict and alignment in mathematics group communication. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 50(6), 1029–1039. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0990-9
Thinsungnoen, T., Kaoungku, N., Durongdumronchai, P., Kerdprasop, K., & Kerdprasop, N. (2015). The clustering validity with silhouette and sum of squared errors. In The proceedings of the 2nd international conference on industrial application engineering 2015 (pp. 44–51). https://doi.org/10.12792/iciae2015.012
Turner, E. E., Drake, C., McDuffie, A. R., Aguirre, J., Bartell, T. G., & Foote, M. Q. (2011). Promoting equity in mathematics teacher preparation: A framework for advancing teacher learning of children’s multiple mathematics knowledge bases. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-011-9196-6
Wilkinson, L. C. (2018). Teaching the language of mathematics: What the research tells us teachers need to know and do. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 51, 167–174.
van Es, E. A. (2012). Examining the development of a teacher learning community: The case of a video club. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(2), 182–192.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), A. R. Luria, M. Lopez-Morillas, & M. Cole, Trans. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology (pp. 39–285). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Code availability
Source code for analyses will be shared upon request.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Both authors contributed to the study conception, design, analysis, and writing. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1. Most frequently appearing noun phrases in the decade corpus
Word 1 | Word 2 | Number of articles in which term appears | Frequency of appearance across all articles | Chi-squared score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Middle | School | 572 | 1672 | 525,375.63 |
Common | Core | 312 | 797 | 646,730.81 |
Help | Students | 363 | 732 | 13,569.3 |
Make | Sense | 236 | 497 | 110,595.22 |
Many | Students | 279 | 420 | 3039.22 |
High | School | 212 | 417 | 85,315.59 |
Real | World | 206 | 415 | 370,013.0 |
Mathematics | Education | 212 | 390 | 30,430.46 |
Sixth | Grade | 190 | 350 | 215,115.4 |
Middle | Grades | 166 | 341 | 74,766.78 |
Proportional | Reasoning | 101 | 333 | 124,657.88 |
Student | Work | 186 | 326 | 10,572.93 |
National | Council | 192 | 324 | 532,476.08 |
Professional | Development | 135 | 312 | 391,772.07 |
Asked | Students | 164 | 311 | 2512.26 |
Seventh | Grade | 192 | 307 | 207,972.03 |
Ask | Students | 192 | 304 | 6112.86 |
Eighth | Grade | 181 | 289 | 196,434.96 |
Mathematical | Ideas | 156 | 284 | 16,186.39 |
Grade | Students | 196 | 281 | 2392.88 |
Surface | Area | 38 | 279 | 157,581.29 |
Conceptual | Understanding | 141 | 279 | 88,867.96 |
Whole | Class | 147 | 271 | 32,192.26 |
Real | Life | 159 | 261 | 202,321.73 |
Other | Students | 179 | 254 | 1005.39 |
Mathematical | Practice | 139 | 253 | 21,405.1 |
Most | Students | 171 | 242 | 2123.05 |
Mathematical | Thinking | 128 | 231 | 8410.75 |
Mathematical | Concepts | 153 | 226 | 14,836.68 |
Each | Group | 124 | 225 | 9390.0 |
List | Price | 48 | 223 | 158,435.72 |
Each | Student | 136 | 218 | 2917.52 |
New | York | 140 | 213 | 164,316.08 |
Different | Ways | 142 | 212 | 21,881.48 |
Elementary | School | 130 | 197 | 37,419.35 |
Total | Number | 87 | 194 | 14,017.58 |
Annual | Meeting | 51 | 192 | 844,118.46 |
Mathematics | Teachers | 129 | 190 | 1511.05 |
Formative | Assessment | 52 | 189 | 323,395.2 |
Pythagorean | Theorem | 62 | 188 | 975,869.9 |
Whole | Number | 80 | 183 | 8428.58 |
Allow | Students | 131 | 176 | 3854.72 |
Small | Groups | 126 | 175 | 50,207.72 |
Classroom | Teachers | 154 | 174 | 4161.94 |
Allows | Students | 115 | 171 | 4133.9 |
Mathematical | Practices | 92 | 170 | 12,070.13 |
Whole | Numbers | 77 | 166 | 12,805.32 |
Prior | Knowledge | 114 | 159 | 116,305.12 |
Mathematical | Reasoning | 85 | 158 | 3580.8 |
Rational | Numbers | 58 | 152 | 49,527.03 |
Math | Class | 112 | 152 | 3942.94 |
Teaching | Practices | 59 | 149 | 21,077.31 |
Engage | Students | 109 | 149 | 1858.09 |
Other | Words | 106 | 149 | 17,763.59 |
Encourage | Students | 107 | 148 | 2544.06 |
Productive | Struggle | 24 | 147 | 252,411.65 |
Each | Other | 103 | 147 | 2308.2 |
Only | One | 106 | 145 | 3594.0 |
Linear | Equations | 53 | 140 | 67,068.26 |
Multiple | Representations | 65 | 139 | 30,870.09 |
Give | Students | 117 | 136 | 1612.05 |
Best | Practices | 131 | 133 | 46,428.27 |
Helped | Students | 97 | 131 | 1796.89 |
Allowed | Students | 96 | 129 | 2255.68 |
Grade | Level | 88 | 129 | 15,923.07 |
Correct | Answer | 81 | 127 | 24,057.27 |
Helps | Students | 99 | 126 | 2889.51 |
Interior | Angles | 15 | 125 | 250,526.63 |
United | States | 82 | 123 | 538,642.84 |
Mathematical | Understanding | 86 | 122 | 1690.84 |
Prospective | Teachers | 54 | 121 | 27,736.92 |
Several | Students | 96 | 120 | 821.48 |
High | Quality | 71 | 114 | 98,142.78 |
Distributive | Property | 39 | 114 | 707,842.01 |
Each | Chapter | 51 | 111 | 14,237.0 |
English | Language | 57 | 109 | 90,505.34 |
Mathematical | Tasks | 67 | 108 | 2932.88 |
Grades | Students | 73 | 107 | 472.58 |
National | Governors | 106 | 107 | 262,191.21 |
Deeper | Understanding | 88 | 106 | 25,806.36 |
Math | Teachers | 79 | 106 | 1115.63 |
Scale | Factor | 20 | 106 | 58,359.5 |
Right | Triangle | 47 | 105 | 26,483.01 |
Every | Student | 70 | 104 | 5031.0 |
Linear | Functions | 45 | 104 | 57,578.55 |
Fraction | Division | 16 | 104 | 24,157.59 |
Net | Worth | 3 | 103 | 150,208.58 |
Mathematical | Success | 64 | 102 | 8548.87 |
Same | Number | 71 | 101 | 1545.66 |
Appendix 2. Frequencies of appearance of International Lexicon Project terms
Term | Frequency of appearance across all articles |
|---|---|
“Aha” moment | 13 |
Access | 408 |
Access prior knowledge | 0 |
Accountability | 26 |
Advocate | 60 |
Agenda | 14 |
Answer questions | 44 |
Ask questions | 148 |
Assess | 420 |
Assign homework | 8 |
Attendance | 8 |
Bell ringer | 7 |
Brainstorm | 55 |
Build rapport | 2 |
Calculate | 713 |
Challenge | 546 |
Check answers | 4 |
Clarify | 168 |
Classroom climate | 4 |
Classroom environment | 35 |
Classroom management | 25 |
Collaborate | 106 |
Collaboration | 156 |
Compare strategies | 3 |
Confusing | 161 |
Confusion | 86 |
Connections | 1117 |
Correct mistakes | 0 |
Creative thinking | 10 |
Critical thinking | 85 |
Culture | 128 |
Differentiation | 75 |
Directions | 155 |
Distribute materials | 1 |
Diversity | 47 |
Do now | 1 |
Effort | 112 |
Equitable | 29 |
Equity | 113 |
Establish routines | 2 |
Example | 1906 |
Exit slip | 11 |
Expectations | 241 |
Explain | 1524 |
Explore | 1412 |
Extra credit | 16 |
Feedback | 310 |
Formative assessment | 212 |
Games | 1076 |
Give directions | 0 |
Give instructions | 1 |
Go over answers | 2 |
Go over homework | 6 |
Group work | 85 |
Growth mindset | 5 |
Guess and check | 90 |
Guided practice | 1 |
Hands-on activity | 26 |
High expectations | 15 |
Hint | 68 |
Homework check | 1 |
Investigation | 363 |
Justify | 381 |
Lightbulb | 25 |
Listening | 231 |
Make connections | 225 |
Manage | 33 |
Manipulatives | 287 |
Mastery | 52 |
Math practices | 174 |
Memorize | 85 |
Mindset | 21 |
Modeling | 2693 |
Multiple strategies | 26 |
Note taking | 5 |
Observe | 353 |
Offer feedback | 4 |
Open-ended question | 19 |
Partner | 213 |
Partner work | 5 |
Pattern recognition | 16 |
Positive feedback | 4 |
Practice | 1975 |
Praise | 10 |
Pre-assessment | 10 |
Presentation | 266 |
Prior knowledge | 159 |
Problem based | 29 |
Problem-based learning | 10 |
Problem-solving | 1022 |
Productive struggle | 147 |
Prove | 188 |
Questioning | 134 |
Quiz | 49 |
Rapport | 4 |
Real world | 415 |
Real-world connections | 7 |
Reasoning | 2415 |
Redirect | 22 |
Reflection | 225 |
Remediation | 17 |
Respect | 68 |
Review | 500 |
Routines | 58 |
Scaffolding | 212 |
Share | 1560 |
Show | 1740 |
Skills practice | 3 |
Social justice | 52 |
Struggling | 704 |
Student accountability | 2 |
Student centered | 52 |
Student presentation | 9 |
Student strategies | 13 |
Study guide | 3 |
Take attendance | 0 |
Take notes | 9 |
Test | 649 |
Testing | 171 |
Think-pair-share | 9 |
Thinking | 2265 |
Try | 799 |
Use manipulatives | 55 |
Volunteer | 27 |
Wait time | 5 |
Warm up | 45 |
Whole class discussion | 142 |
Word problem | 300 |
Worked example | 31 |
Writing | 595 |
Appendix 3. Regressions of terms with the largest slopes and smallest p values
Term | m | b | r squared | p value | Standard error |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
10 terms with largest slopes | |||||
practice | 0.157 | 3 | 0.449 | 0 | 0.019 |
thinking | 0.072 | 9.3 | 0.148 | 0.0003 | 0.019 |
common core | 0.07 | 0.9 | 0.248 | 0 | 0.013 |
modeling | 0.053 | 13.4 | 0.014 | 0.2863 | 0.05 |
share | 0.05 | 6.4 | 0.064 | 0.0191 | 0.021 |
struggling | 0.036 | 2 | 0.033 | 0.0937 | 0.021 |
productive struggle | 0.033 | − 1.1 | 0.056 | 0.0294 | 0.015 |
formative assessment | 0.032 | − 0.4 | 0.026 | 0.1414 | 0.021 |
feedback | 0.026 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0032 | 0.008 |
access | 0.024 | 1 | 0.084 | 0.0071 | 0.009 |
10 terms with smallest p values | |||||
practice | 0.157 | 3 | 0.449 | 0 | 0.019 |
common core | 0.07 | 0.9 | 0.248 | 0 | 0.013 |
equity | 0.015 | − 0.2 | 0.192 | 0 | 0.003 |
thinking | 0.072 | 9.3 | 0.148 | 0.0003 | 0.019 |
feedback | 0.026 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0032 | 0.008 |
access | 0.024 | 1 | 0.084 | 0.0071 | 0.009 |
warm up | 0.005 | 0 | 0.075 | 0.0113 | 0.002 |
growth mindset | 0.001 | 0 | 0.069 | 0.0149 | 0.001 |
math practices | 0.018 | 0 | 0.069 | 0.0152 | 0.007 |
share | 0.05 | 6.4 | 0.064 | 0.0191 | 0.021 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dobie, T.E., Sherin, B. The language of mathematics teaching: a text mining approach to explore the zeitgeist of US mathematics education. Educ Stud Math 107, 159–188 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10019-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-10019-8