A Framework for Improving the Teaching of Mathematics to Bi/Multilingual Learners

  • Kara Mitchell ViescaEmail author
  • Nicole M. Joseph
  • Nancy L. Commins
Part of the English Language Education book series (ELED, volume 17)


To teach mathematics well to bi/multilingual learners, we propose that mathematics teachers should consider the following five elements: know the content, know the language, know the learner, engage the community and assess meaningfully. This chapter defines each of these elements, explores how they are put into practice, and shares the responses of teachers who have participated in online professional development organized around each element. By approaching mathematics teaching with these elements in mind, teachers can more effectively support high levels of learning and achievement for bi/multilingual learners across levels of English proficiency and grade levels.


  1. Doherty, R. W., & Hilberg, R. S. (2007). Standards for effective pedagogy, classroom organization, English proficiency, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 24–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Doherty, R. W., Hilberg, R. S., Pinal, A., & Tharp, R. G. (2003). Five standards and student achievement. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 1(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  3. Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2003). Rethinking English language instruction: An architectural approach. English learners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy, 227. Retrieved from
  4. Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hilberg, R. S., Tharp, R. G., & DeGeest, L. (2000). The efficacy of CREDE’s standards-based instruction in American Indian mathematics classes. Equity & Excellence in Education, 33(2), 32–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lucas, T., & Villegas, A. M. (2011). A framework for preparing linguistically responsive teachers. In T. Lucas (Ed.), Teacher preparation for linguistically diverse classrooms: A resource for teacher educators (pp. 55–72). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Teemant, A., Leland, C., & Berghoff, B. (2014). Development and validation of a measure of critical stance for instructional coaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 136–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Tharp, R. G., Estrada, P., Dalton, S. S., & Yamauchi, L. A. (2000). Teaching transformed: Achieving excellence, fairness, inclusion, and harmony. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  11. Viesca, K. M., Hamilton, B., Davidson, A., & The eCALLMS Team. (2016). Supporting linguistically responsive teaching: e-Learning communities for academic language learning in mathematics and science (eCALLMS). In C. P. Proctor, A. Boardman, & E. H. Hiebert (Eds.), Teaching emergent bilingual students: Flexible approaches in an era of new standards (pp. 215–236). New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  12. WIDA. (2017). Speaking and writing interpretive rubrics. Retrieved from:
  13. WIDA. (n.d.). Can do descriptors. Retrieved from
  14. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kara Mitchell Viesca
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nicole M. Joseph
    • 2
  • Nancy L. Commins
    • 3
  1. 1.University of NebraskaLincolnUSA
  2. 2.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  3. 3.University of ColoradoDenverUSA

Personalised recommendations