Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Linguistic Tools for Exploring Issues of Equity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Equity in Discourse for Mathematics Education

Part of the book series: Mathematics Education Library ((MELI,volume 55))

Abstract

This chapter describes linguistics tools that researchers have used to explore and illuminate equity issues in the mathematics classroom. Drawing primarily from research using a systemic functional linguistics (SFL) framework, it illustrates how close attention to language forms and the meanings they present can inform questions about the nature of the mathematics that is offered to students through classroom discourse, the views of mathematics activity that students develop, and how students are positioned as learners through classroom and pedagogical discourses. Analysis of thematic patterns, process/participant configurations, modality, and mood/speech function enables researchers to explore the integrity of the mathematics that is taught, how concepts are developed over time, and the processes through which knowledge is developed. In focus are issues such as the agency of students and the authoritativeness of the teacher as well as the role of the teacher as mediator of learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Schleppegrell (2004) for an overview. For a complementary discussion of SFL and arguments and examples related to its use in mathematics discourse analysis, see Morgan (2006). O’Halloran (2005) provides a detailed analysis of mathematics discourse using SFL. For a more extensive review of research on language in mathematics, see Schleppegrell (2010).

  2. 2.

    Different SFL analysts divide the experiential space in different ways, with Halliday and Matthiessen (2004) offering categories of material, behavioral, verbal, mental, relational and existential meanings, while Martin and Rose (2003) conceptualize processes as of four types, doing, saying, sensing and being. As with all linguistic notions, these categories can be specified in greater or lesser detail, depending on the goals of the analysis.

  3. 3.

    The key point is that different process types are distinguished on the basis of grammatical criteria; for further information, see Halliday and Matthiessen (2004) or Fang and Schleppegrell (2008).

  4. 4.

    These linguistic tools can also be used for pedagogical purposes. Students can be made aware of how mathematics discourse works, engaging in critical discussion about how it positions them as learners. Teachers and students can engage in functional language analysis to unpack dense academic language, including the language of mathematics word problems and texts (Huang and Normandia 2008). Other linguistic tools are also available through SFL analysis – see González (2009) for an analysis of how conjunctions help a teacher structure an oral proof.

References

  • Burton, L., & Morgan, C. (2000). Mathematicians writing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 429–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, A. (1995). Intertextuality in school mathematics: The case of functions. Linguistics and Education, 7(3), 243–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, A. (2003). Language practices in school mathematics: A social semiotic approach. Lewiston: Edwin Mellen Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, F. (2002). Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fang, Z., Schleppegrell, M., Lukin, A., Huang, J., & Normandia, B. (2008). Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, G. (2009). Mathematical tasks and the collective memory: How do teachers manage students’ prior knowledge when teaching geometry with problems?. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, G. (2011). Who does what? A linguistic approach to analyzing teachers’ reactions to videos. ZDM The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(1), 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, R. (2002a). Enabling the practice of mathematics teachers in context: Toward a new equity research agenda. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2/3), 145–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutiérrez, R. (2007b). Context matters: Equity, success, and the future of mathematics education. In T. Lamberg & L. Wiest (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1–18). Stateline: University of Nevada, Reno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. (1978). Sociolinguistic aspects of mathematics education. In M. Halliday (Ed.), Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning (pp. 194–204). London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: Examining the “voice” of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(4), 344–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Schleppegrell, M. (2008). “What question would I be asking myself in my head?”: Helping all students reason mathematically. In M. Ellis (Ed.), Mathematics for every student: Responding to diversity, grades 6–8 (pp. 23–37). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Wagner, D. (2005). In the middle of nowhere: How a textbook can position the mathematics learner. In H. Chick & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 121–128). Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J., & Normandia, B. (2008). Comprehending and solving word problems in mathematics: Beyond key words. In Z. Fang, M. Schleppegrell, A. Lukin, J. Huang, & B. Normandia (Eds.), Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy (pp. 64–83). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., & White, P. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mesa, V., & Chang, P. (2010). The language of engagement in two highly interactive undergraduate mathematics classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 21(2), 83–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C. (2005). Word, definitions and concepts in discourses of mathematics, teaching and learning. Language and Education, 19(2), 102–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, C. (2006). What does social semiotics have to offer mathematics education research? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Halloran, K. (1998). Classroom discourse in mathematics: A multisemiotic analysis. Linguistics and Education, 10(3), 359–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Halloran, K. (2004). Discourses in secondary school mathematics classrooms according to social class and gender. In J. Foley (Ed.), Language, education and discourse: Functional approaches (pp. 191–225). London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Halloran, K. (2005). Mathematical discourse: Language, symbolism and visual images. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotman, B. (2000). Mathematics as sign: Writing, imagining, counting. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, T. (1999). Pronouns in mathematics talk: Power, vagueness and generalisation. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(2), 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schleppegrell, M. (2010). Language in mathematics teaching and learning: A research review. In J. Moschkovich (Ed.), Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research (pp. 73–112). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shreyar, S., Zolkower, B., & Pérez, S. (2010). Thinking aloud together: A teacher’s semiotic mediation of a whole-class conversation about percents. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(1), 21–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zolkower, B., & Shreyar, S. (2007). A teacher’s mediation of a thinking-aloud discussion in a 6th grade mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(2), 177–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank David Pimm for helpful comments in the development of this chapter, while not holding him responsible in any way for the final product.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Mary Schleppegrell

Authors
  1. Mary Schleppegrell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Schleppegrell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Michigan State University, Erickson Hall 329, East Lansing, 48824, Michigan, USA

    Beth Herbel-Eisenmann

  2. , Warner School of Education, University of Rochester, Box 270425, Rochester, 14627, New York, USA

    Jeffrey Choppin

  3. , Faculty of Education, University of New Brunswick, P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, E3B 5A3, Canada

    David Wagner

  4. Dept. Secondary Education, University of Alberta, Education South 341, Edmonton, T6G 2G5, Alberta, Canada

    David Pimm

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schleppegrell, M. (2012). Linguistic Tools for Exploring Issues of Equity. In: Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Choppin, J., Wagner, D., Pimm, D. (eds) Equity in Discourse for Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education Library, vol 55. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2813-4_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation