Abstract
Language, which plays a special role for the learning of mathematics, is investigated in this article for the specific discourse practice of explaining during whole-class discussions: On the one hand, explaining is a medium for learning since school cannot be thought of without communication. On the other hand, students at the beginning of secondary school are still in the process of language acquisition and are also still learning how to communicate mathematically. Thus, students are learning to explain in mathema-tics classrooms. This empirical study focuses on the overall question of how discourse competence, participation in classroom discourse, and mathematical learning opportunities are related. For that purpose, the approach of Interactional Discourse Analysis is introduced to mathematics education research and coordinated with the Interactional-Epistemic Perspective from mathematics education. The relevance of explaining is shown theoretically and empirically and a description is given of how limited discourse competence and limited epistemic participation proceed across situations.
Highlights
Language, which plays a special role for the learning of mathematics, is investigated in this article for the specific discourse practice of explaining during whole-class discussions: On the one hand, explaining is a medium for learning since school cannot be thought of without communication
The present study shows that the discourse practice of explaining in whole-class discussions is a crucial learning medium; at the same time, it is an underrepresented learning goal, and classrooms should provide opportunities for learning to explain as part of language proficiency on the discourse level
The present study aims at gaining a deeper understanding of the interplay between, rather than unidirectional impact of, academic language proficiency on the discourse level, participation in classroom discourse, and mathematics learning opportunities
Summary
Krummheuer (2011) and Sfard (2008) gave the term participationist perspectives to all those theoretical approaches in which learning is conceptualized as participation in classroom discourses: BWhereas acquisitionists view individual development as proceeding from personal acquisitions to participation in collective activities, participationists reverse the picture and claim that people go from participation in collectively implemented activities to similar forms of doing performed single-handedly^ (Sfard, 2008, p. 78). The IEP elaborated interactionist traditions (Section 1.1) by analyzing the joint epistemic processes of knowledge constitution systematically In this way, it investigates which forms of knowledge (conceptual/procedural) are constituted in which epistemic modes (e.g., explicit formulations, exemplifications, or functions) and by whom in the interaction in mathematics classrooms. It investigates which forms of knowledge (conceptual/procedural) are constituted in which epistemic modes (e.g., explicit formulations, exemplifications, or functions) and by whom in the interaction in mathematics classrooms For this epistemic focus, Prediger and Erath (2014) developed the epistemic matrix as tool for analyzing explanations in whole-class discussions (Fig. 3) since they serve as important mathematical learning opportunities. The interactive process can be visualized and an individual student’s contribution can be located from a mathematical perspective (in the matrix) but especially in its embedding in the process (in the pathway)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
