Research paper
CC-BY 4.0

Pedagogical Demands in Mathematics and Mathematical Literacy: A Case of Mathematics and Mathematical Literacy Teachers and Facilitators

University of South Africa, SOUTH AFRICA
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2018;14(1):95–108
Online publish date: 2017-10-05
Publish date: 2017-10-30
The purpose of this article is to examine teachers’ and facilitators’ (subject advisors) views of the approaches to teaching mathematics and mathematical literacy (ML). Using Bernstein’s (1996) constructs of recognition and realisation rules, I analysed data from interviews conducted with mathematics and ML teachers and facilitators. The analysis shows that some teaching strategies are associated with mathematics and others with ML. That is, teachers and facilitators refer to teaching strategies that are domain specific (mathematics and ML). I therefore ask what it means for teaching strategies to be domain specific, particularly in the context of mathematics and ML.
France Masilo Machaba   
University of South Africa, 194 Block CC, Soshanguve, 0152, 0152 pretoria, South Africa
1. Bernstein, B. (1982). On the classification and Framing of Educational Knowledge. In T. Horton & P. Raggatt, (Eds.), Challenge and change in the curriculum, 149-176, Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University.
2. Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique (Revised Edition). Oxford: Rowan & Littlefield.
3. Boaler, J. & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608-645.
4. Boaler, J. (1997) Experiencing school Mathematics: teaching styles, sex and setting. Buckingham: Open University Press.
5. Boaler, J. (2015). What’s math got to do with it? How teachers and parents can transform mathematics learning and inspire success. Penguin.
6. Boaler, J., & Sengupta-Irving, T. (2016). The many colors of algebra: The impact of equity focused teaching upon student learning and engagement. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 41, 179-190. Mathematics Learning and Inspire Success. Penguin, 2015.
7. Brodie, K. (2008). Describing teacher change: Interactions between teacher moves and learner contributions. In Proceedings of the fifth international mathematics education and society conference (MES5) (pp. 31-50).
8. Brombacher, A. (2006). First draft of the report on the SAQA Mathematical Literacy Standards at NQF levels 2, 3 and 4 SAQA.
9. Civil, M. (2002). Culture and mathematics: A community approach. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 23(2), 133-148.
10. Civil, M. (2016). STEM learning research through a funds of knowledge lens. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(1), 41-59.
11. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrisson, K. (Eds.) (2007). Research Methods in Education. USA: Routledge.
12. Department of Basic Education [DBE] (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement 10–12 (General): Mathematical Literacy. Pretoria: Department of Education.
13. Department of Basic Education [DBE]. (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement 10–12 (General): Mathematics. Pretoria: Department of Education.
14. Department of Education [DoE]. (2003a). National Curriculum Statement Grades 10-12 (General): Mathematical Literacy: Department of Education.
15. Department of Education [DoE]. (2003b). National Curriculum Statement Grades 10-12 (General): Mathematics: Department of Education.
16. Department of Education [DoE]. (2006). National Curriculum Statement Grades 10-12, Teachers Guide, Mathematical Literacy: Mathematical: Department of Education.
17. Graven, M., & Venkat, H. (2007). Emerging pedagogic agendas in the teaching of Mathematical Literacy. African Journal of Research in SMT Education, 11(2), 67-84.
18. Graven, M., & Venkatakrishnan, H. (2006). Emerging successes and tensions in the implementation of Mathematical Literacy. Learning and Teaching Mathematics 4, 5-9.
19. Harley, K., & Parker, B. (1999). Integrating differences: Implications of an outcomes- based national qualifications framework for the roles and competencies of teachers. In J. Jansen & P. Christie (Eds.), Changing curriculum: studies on outcomes-based education in South Africa (pp. 181-200). Kenwyn, South Africa: Juta & Co.
20. Hierbert, J., Carpenter, P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Wearne, D. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for Reform in Curriculum and Instruction: The case of Mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.
21. Jacobs, V. R., & Empson, S. B. (2016). Responding to children’s mathematical thinking in the moment: an emerging framework of teaching moves. ZDM, 48(1-2), 185-197.
22. Laridon, P. (2004). Help wanted-The journal’s question and answer column. Learning and Teaching Mathematics, 1, 37-38.
23. Laridon, P. (2006). Background to the introduction of Mathematical Literacy.
24. Le Roux, K., & Adler, J. (2016). A critical discourse analysis of practical problems in a foundation mathematics course at a South African university. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 91(2), 227-246.
25. Leedy, D., & Ormrod, J. (2001). Practical research planning and design. United States of America: Carlistic Communication, Ltd,.
26. Machaba, F. M. (2016). The concepts of area and perimeter: insights and misconceptions of Grade 10 learners: original research. Pythagoras, 37(1), 1-11.
27. Machaba, F., & Makgaka, S. (2016). Grade 9 learners’ understanding of the concept of the equal sing: A case study of a secondary school in Soshanguve. In: J. Kriek, B. Bantwini, C. Ochonogor, J. Dhlamini, L. Gooses (Eds.): ISTE Conference on Mathematics, Science and Technology. Education: Towards Effective Teaching and Meaningful Learning Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Mopani Camp in Kruger National Park, University of South Africa.
28. Maree, K. (2007). Find steps in research. Hatfield, Pretoria: Van Schaik,.
29. McMillan, H. J., & Schumacher, S. (2001). Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction. USA: Addison Wesley Longman.
30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
31. Newman, W. L. (1994). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
32. OPie, C. (Ed.). (2004). Doing educational research. London: Sage South Africa, 23 – 28 October 2017, pp. 149–160.
33. Parker, D. (2008). The specialization of pedagogic identities in initial mathematics teacher education in post-apartheid South Africa (Unpublished PhD Thesis), University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
34. QCA. (2005). Functional Skills, Update 2, winter 2005.
35. Selling, S. K. (2016). Making Mathematical Practices Explicit in Urban Middle and High School Mathematics Classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(5), 505-551.
36. Simpson, A., & Haltiwanger, L. (2016) “This is the First Time I’ve Done This”: Exploring secondary prospective mathematics teachers’ noticing of students’ mathematical thinking. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1-21.
37. Skemp, R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics teaching, 77, 20-26.
38. Steen, L. A. (2001). The case for quantitative literacy. In: National Council on Education and the Disciplines. Washington: The Mathematics Association of America.
39. Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (Eds.). (2016). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
40. Venkat, H. (2007). Mathematical Literacy – mathematics and/or literacy: what is being sought? Pythagoras, 65, 76-84.
41. Venkat, H., & Graven, M. (2008). Opening up spaces for learning: Learners’ perceptions of Mathematical Literacy in Grade 10. Education as Change, 12(1), 29-44.