How should we expect growing understandings of the nature of mathematical practice to inform classroom mathematical practice? We address this question from a perspective that takes seriously the notion that mathematics education, as a societal enterprise, is accountable to multiple sets of stakeholders, with the discipline of mathematics being only one of them. As they lead instruction, teachers can benefit from the influence of understandings of mathematical practice but they also need to recognize obligations to other stakeholders. We locate how mathematics instruction may actively respond to the influence of the discipline of mathematics and we exemplify how obligations to other stakeholders may participate in the practical rationality of mathematics teaching as those influences are incorporated into instruction.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
To define the didactical contract in terms of differential roles in coming to know the content highlights the notion that instruction is only one of the activities that teachers and students participate in. Other activities, such as mentoring youth, are not only legitimate and expected ones for a teacher to engage in, but also activities that compete with instruction for resources such as time and rapport.
Chevallard (1991) calls mathematical notions those that are explicit objects of study in mathematics. For example, any mathematical idea that receives a definition and whose properties are studied is a mathematical notion. Paramathematical notions, in contrast, are those which are explicitly used as tools in the study of mathematical notions, but are not themselves constructed as objects of study (e.g., the notions of definition or parameter).
Chevallard (1991) also speaks of protomathematical notions, which are implicit, subject-specific notions that support the functioning of mathematical practice. For example, the notion of strength of a proposition or the notion of pattern.
Foucault (2005) uses these similitudes to examine the evolution of scientific discourses.
For example there are characteristics of individual students that are more salient in mathematics than in other areas, such as intelligence, given the societal assumption of a correlation between calculation speed and intelligence. There are social expectations farmed out to school mathematics such as helping decide on merit for college admissions (through college aptitude tests such as the US’s SAT). And there are program evaluation functions that schooling institutions farm out to school mathematics, such as growth in mathematics test scores as an indication of school effectiveness. These three may be questionable, but they are part of the reality that mathematics teachers, especially, have to contend with.
Alagia, H. (1998). Mathematicians, mathematics teachers and mathematical discourse. The Mathematics Educator, 9(2), 38–41.
Alibert, D. (1988). Towards new customs in the classroom. For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(2), 31–43.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2009). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Brousseau, G. (1997). In: N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland & V. Warfield (Eds.), Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Brousseau, G., & Otte, M. (1991). The fragility of knowledge. In A. Bishop, S. Mellin-Olsen, & J. van Dormolen (Eds.), Mathematical knowledge: Its growth through teaching (pp. 11–36). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bruner, J. S. (2009). The process of education (Rev. ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1960).
Chazan, D. (1990). Quasi-empirical views of mathematics and mathematics teaching. Interchange, 21(1), 14–23.
Chazan, D., Herbst, P., & Clark, L. (2016). Research on the teaching of mathematics: A call to theorize the role of society and schooling in mathematics. In D. Gitomer & C. Bell (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (5th ed., pp. 1039–1097). Washington, DC: AERA.
Chevallard, Y. (1991). La transposition didactique: Du savoir savant au savoir enseignée (2nd ed.). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119–142.
Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(4), 375–402.
Dieudonné, J. A. (1973). Views: Should we teach "modern" mathematics? An affirmation from a founder of Bourbaki of the principles of the new curricula in mathematics. American Scientist, 61(1), 16–19.
Donaldson, B., Nakamaye, M., Umland, K., & White, D. (2014). Math Teachers’ Circles: Partnerships between mathematicians and teachers. Notices of the AMS, 61(11), 1335–1341.
Foucault, M. (2005). The order of things. Abingdon: Routledge.
Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103(4), 650–669. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.4.650.
Ginsburg, H. P. (2009). The challenge of formative assessment in mathematics education: Children’s minds, teachers’ minds. Human Development, 52(2), 109–128.
Grabiner, J. V. (1977). Mathematics in America: The first hundred years. In D. Tarwater (Ed.), The bicentennial tribute to American mathematics, 1776–1976 (pp. 9–24). Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
Herbst, P. (2002). Establishing a custom of proving in American school geometry: Evolution of the two-column proof in the early twentieth century. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 283–312.
Herbst, P. (2008). The teacher and the task. In O. Figueras, J. Cortina, S. Alatorre, T. Rojano, & A. Sepúlveda (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32th Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 125–131). Morelia: Universidad Michoacana San Nicolás de Hidalgo.
Herbst, P. (2012). Las tareas matemáticas como instrumentos en la investigación de los fenómenos de gestión de la instrucción: un ejemplo en geometría. Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática, 1, 5–22.
Herbst, P., & Chazan, D. (2003). Exploring the practical rationality of mathematics teaching through conversations about videotaped episodes: The case of engaging students in proving. For the Learning of Mathematics, 23(1), 2–14.
Herbst, P., & Chazan, D. (2012). On the instructional triangle and sources of justification for actions in mathematics teaching. ZDM, 44(5), 601–612.
Herbst, P. and Dimmel, J. (2011). Teaching geometry through problems and its demands of knowledge management. Paper presented at the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
Herbst, P., & Miyakawa, T. (2008). When, how, and why prove theorems: A methodology to study the perspective of geometry teachers. ZDM, 40(3), 469–486.
Herbst, P., Nachlieli, T., & Chazan, D. (2011). Studying the practical rationality of mathematics teaching: What goes into “installing” a theorem in geometry? Cognition and Instruction, 29(2), 218–255.
Inglis, M., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2009). The effect of authority on the persuasiveness of mathematical arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 27(1), 25–50.
Jackson, A. (1997a). The math wars: California battles it out over mathematics education reform (Part I). Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 44(6), 695–702.
Jackson, A. (1997). The math wars: California battles it out over mathematics education reform (Part II). Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 44(7), 817–823.
Kliebard, H. (1986). The struggle for the American curriculum: 1893–1958. Boston: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Komatsu, K. (2016). A framework for proofs and refutations in school mathematics: Increasing content by deductive guessing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 92, 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9677-0.
Lakatos, I. (1976). In: J. Worrall, E. Zahar, (Eds.), Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lampert, M. (1992). Practices and problems in teaching authentic mathematics. In F. Oser (Ed.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis (pp. 295–314). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Livingston, E. (1999). Cultures of proving. Social Studies of Science, 29(6), 867–888.
Mancosu, P. (Ed.). (2008). The philosophy of mathematical practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
National Governors Association. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: National Governors Association.
National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NCTM. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
Playfair, J. (1860). Elements of geometry; containing the first six books of euclid, with a supplement on the quadrature of the circle, and the geometry of solids. To which are added elements of plane and spherical trigonometry. New York: Collins and Hannay.
Polya, G. (1962). Mathematical discovery. Hoboken: Wiley.
Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315–342.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Explorations of students' mathematical beliefs and behavior. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(4), 338–355.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1996). In fostering communities of inquiry, must it matter that the teacher “knows the answer"? For the learning of mathematics, 16(3), 11–16.
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.
Thom, R. (1971). Modern mathematics: An educational and philosophic error? A distinguished French mathematician takes issue with recent curricular innovations in his field. American Scientist, 59(6), 695–699.
Umland, K. (2008). A reflection on mathematical cognition: How far have we come and where are we going? The Mathematics Enthusiast, 5(1), 101–116.
Weiss, M. K. (2009). Mathematical sense, mathematical sensibility: The role of the secondary geometry course in teaching students to be like mathematicians. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Weiss, M., & Herbst, P. (2015). The role of theory building in the teaching of secondary geometry. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(2), 205–229.
Weiss, M., Herbst, P., & Chen, C. (2009). Teachers’ perspectives on "authentic mathematics" and the two-column proof form. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(3), 275–293.
Wu, H. (1996). The mathematician and the mathematics education reform. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 43(12), 1531–1537.
The writing of this paper has been supported in part by Grants DUE 1725837, ESI-0353285, and DRL-1316241 from the US National Science Foundation to the first author. All opinions are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Foundation.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Herbst, P., Chazan, D. Mathematics teaching has its own imperatives: mathematical practice and the work of mathematics instruction. ZDM Mathematics Education 52, 1149–1162 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01157-7
- Mathematical practice
- Instructional exchanges
- Professional obligations
- Practical rationality
- Didactical contract
- Didactical transposition
- Professional community