Chapter 8: Development of Modelling Routines and Its Relation to Identity Construction

  • Juhaina Awawdeh ShahbariEmail author
  • Michal Tabach
  • Einat Heyd-Metzuyanim
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)


In this chapter, we link between modelling activity and affect through the concept of “identifying” or identity construction, as conceptualized within the communicational framework (Heyd-Metzuyanim and Sfard 2012; Sfard 2008). Our aim is to trace the development of modelling abilities through following the development of routines and the changes in identifying talk that co-occur along this development. For this aim, we follow a group of five prospective teachers as they worked on two model-eliciting tasks. Their working process was video recorded and transcribed. The participants’ discourse was analyzed to identify changes in routines while working on the two modelling tasks along with changes in their subjectifying talk (communication about themselves and others). We were able to trace changes in both these measures. Regarding the mathematical talk, we identify a change from a nonsystematic choosing-routine to systematic-choosing-routines and from routines that focus on choosing specific cases to routines that focus on eliciting criterions for choosing. Regarding their identifying activity, we show how participants initially build on their everyday roles in real life (such as mother, citizen and student), to justify their claims in the modelling activity. Later, when routines become more systematic and established, there is much less identifying talk, and claims are justified based on mathematical narratives. We link these findings to previous findings regarding the interaction of mathematizing and identifying activities in mathematical learning.


Modelling Model eliciting activities Routine Communicational framework Identity Subjectifying and mathematizing 


  1. Doerr, H. M., & English, L. D. (2003). A modeling perspective on students’ mathematical reasoning about data. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34(2), 110–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. English, L. D. (2003). Problem posing in the elementary curriculum. In F. Lester & R. Charles (Eds.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving (pp. 187–198). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  3. English, L. D. (2006). Mathematical modeling in the primary school: Children’s construction of a consumer guide. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62(3), 303–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. English, L. D., & Fox, J. L. (2005). Seventh-graders’ mathematical modelling on completion of a three-year program. In P. Clarkson et al. (Eds.), Building connections: Theory, research and practice (Vol. 1, pp. 321–328). Melbourne: Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  5. English, L. D., & Watters, J. J. (2005). Mathematical modeling in the early school years. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 16(3), 58–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., & Sfard, A. (2012). Identity struggles in the mathematics classroom: On learning mathematics as an interplay of mathematizing and identifying. International Journal of Educational Research, 51–52, 128–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. (2003). Foundation of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching and learning. In R. A. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching, learning, and problem solving (pp. 9–34). Mahwah: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lesh, R., & Zawojewski, J. S. (2007). Problem solving and modeling. In F. Lester (Ed.), The second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 763–804). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  9. Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Principles for developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers. In R. Lesh & A. Kelly (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 591–644). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Sfard, A., & Lavie, I. (2005). Why cannot children see as the same what grown-ups cannot see as different?—early numerical thinking revisited. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 237–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sfard, A., & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shahbari, J. A., & Tabach, M. (2016). Developing modelling lenses among practicing teachers. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(5), 717–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shahbari, J. A., & Tabach, M. (2017). The commognitive framework lens to identify the development of modelling routines. In B. Kaur, W. Kin Ho, & B. Heng Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 4, pp. 192–185). Singapore: PME.Google Scholar
  15. Tabach, M., & Nachlieli, T. (2016). Communicational perspectives on learning and teaching mathematics: Prologue. Educational Studies in Mathematics (ESM), 91(3), 299–306. Scholar
  16. Vorhölter, K., Kaiser, G., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2014). Modelling in mathematics classroom instruction: An innovative approach for transforming mathematics education. In Y. Li, E. A. Silver, & S. Li (Eds.), Transforming mathematics instruction (pp. 21–36). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juhaina Awawdeh Shahbari
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michal Tabach
    • 2
  • Einat Heyd-Metzuyanim
    • 3
  1. 1.Sakhnin CollegeAl-Qasemi AcademyBaqa El-GharbiyyeIsrael
  2. 2.Tel-Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  3. 3.TechnionHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations