Advertisement

Interactional Processes in Inclusive Mathematics Teaching

  • Judith Jung
Chapter
Part of the ICME-13 Monographs book series (ICME13Mo)

Abstract

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities requires that persons with disabilities should not be excluded from the general education system. This legal right surpasses the mere freedom of choice to attend a regular school. Against the backdrop of this transformation of the practice of mathematics learning in Germany, this article examines the potential for social and content-related participation in inclusive school teaching that may emerge in whole class discussions among students, teachers and pedagogical staff. The data comprises transcripts of video-recorded lessons that were analysed through interactional analysis. The presented analyses of classroom conversations in a Year 1 class reveal interaction that was structured by the teacher through repetitive sequences, enabling the participation of many pupils but providing them few opportunities to participate outside of these structures.

Keywords

Classroom interaction Discourse Inclusion Epistemological perspective Student participation 

References

  1. Bartelheimer, P. (2008). Was bedeutet Teilhabe? In J. Maedler (Ed.), TeilHabeNichtse. Chancengerechtigkeit und kulturelle Bildung (pp. 13–19). München, Germany: Kopaed.Google Scholar
  2. Bauersfeld, H., Krummheuer, G., & Voigt, J. (1988). Interactional theory of learning and teaching mathematics and related microethnographical studies. In H.-G. Steiner & A. Vermandel (Eds.), Foundations and Methodology of the Discipline Mathematics Education (pp. 174–188). University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
  3. Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematical enculturation: A cultural perspective on mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism. Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: University Press Group Ltd.Google Scholar
  5. Booth, T., & Ainscow, M. (2002). Index for inclusion: Developing learning and participation in schools. Bristol, UK: Centre for Studies on Inclusive Education.Google Scholar
  6. Brandt, B. (2017). Spiel-Räume der Partizipation. In M. Beck & R. Vogel (Eds.), Geometrische Aktivitäten und Gespräche von Kindern im Blick qualitativen Forschens – Mehrperspektivische Ergebnisse aus den Projekten erStMaL und MaKreKi (pp. 107–132). Festschrift für Götz Krummheuer. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  7. Department for Education & Department for Heath. (Eds.). (2015). Special educational needs and disability code of practice: 0 to 25 years. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25. Accessed September 12, 2017.
  8. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  9. Johannson, M. (2015). Perceptions of mathematics in preschool. Luleå, Sweden: Luleå University of Technology.Google Scholar
  10. Jung, J., & Schütte, M. (2017). Content-related and social participation in inclusive mathematics education. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth congress of the European society for research in mathematics education. Dublin, Ireland: DCU Institute of Education and ERME.Google Scholar
  11. Katzenbach, D. (2012). In Widersprüchen denken, und dennoch handlungsfähig bleiben - Inklusion in einem segregierenden Schulsystem. In GEW Lüneburg (Eds.), Widerstehen lernen – wieder stehen lernen (pp. 99–133). Moisburg, Germany: GEW Lüneburg.Google Scholar
  12. Klemm, K. (2013). Inklusion in Deutschland – eine bildungsstatistische Analyse. Gütersloh, Germany: Bertelsmann Stiftung.Google Scholar
  13. Krummheuer, G. (1992). Lernen mit »Format«. Elemente einer interaktionistischen Lerntheorie. Diskutiert an Beispielen mathematischen Unterrichts. Weinheim, Germany: Deutscher Studien Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Krummheuer, G. (1995). The Ethnography of Argumentation. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning (pp. 229–270). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. Krummheuer, G., & Brandt, B. (2001). Paraphrase und Traduktion. Partizipationstheoretische Elemente einer Interaktionstheorie des Mathematiklernens in der Grundschule. Weinheim, Germany: Beltz.Google Scholar
  16. Lerman, S. (2000). The social turn in mathematics education research. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 19–44). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  17. Miller, M. (1986). Kollektive Lernprozesse. Studien zur Grundlegung einer soziologischen Lerntheorie. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  18. Roos, H. (2014). Inclusion in mathematics in primary school. Växjö, Sweden: Linnaeus University.Google Scholar
  19. Schütte, M. (2014). Language-related specialised learning in mathematics. A comparison of learning settings: family, nursery and primary school. The International Journal on Mathematics Education (ZDM), 46 (6), 923–938.Google Scholar
  20. Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Länder (Eds.). (2016). Compact data on education. The most important statistics on the educational system in Germany. Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
  21. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses and mathematizing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (Eds.). (2005). Guidelines for inclusion: Ensuring access to education for all. France: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  23. Voigt, J. (1984). Interaktionsmuster und Routinen im Mathematikunterricht. Theoretische Grundlagen und mikroethnographische Fallunterscheidungen. Weinheim, Germany: Beltz Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Wiebe Berry, R. A., & Kim, N. (2008). Exploring teacher talk during mathematics instruction in an inclusion classroom. Journal of Educational Research, 101(6), 363–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technical University DresdenDresdenGermany

Personalised recommendations