Teachers’ and Students’ Negotiation Moves When Teachers Scaffold Group Work

REFERENCES

• Anghileri, J. (2006). Scaffolding practices that enhance mathematics learning. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 33–52.
   Google Scholar
• Barrows, H.S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curricula for the preclinical years. New York, NY: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bass, L.E., Bellman, A., Bragg, S.C., Charles, R.I., Davidson, D.M., Handlin, W.G., & Johnson, A., (2004). Geometry. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Berry, M. (1981). Systemic linguistics and discourse analysis: A multi-layered approach to exchange structure. In M. Coulthard & M. Montgomery (Eds.), Studies in discourse analysis. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Bliss, J., Askew, M., & Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1), 37–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boaler, J. (1998). Open and closed mathematics: Student experiences and understandings. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 41–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boaler, J., & Greeno, J.G. (2000). Identity, agency, and knowing in mathematical worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 45–82). Stamford, CT: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bossé, M.J., & Adu-Gyamfi, K. (2011). Stop teaching and let students learn geometry. The Mathematics Teacher, 105(4), 293–297.
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice (R. Nice, Trans.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: Didactique des Mathematiques 1970–1990 (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield, Trans.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, A.L., & Palincsar, A.S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from texts by means of informed, self-control training. Topics in Learning and Disabilities, 2(1), 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Cai, J., Wang, N., Moyer, J.C., Wang, C., & Nie, B. (2011). Longitudinal investigation of the curricular effect: An analysis of student learning outcomes from the LieCal project in the United States. International Journal of Educational Research, 50, 117–136.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C.B. (1979). Peekaboo as an instructional model: Discourse development at home and school. In Papers and reports on child language development (No. 17). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University, Department of Linguistics.
   Google Scholar
• Cazden, C.B. (2001). Classroom discourse (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Chazan, D. (2000). Beyond formulas in mathematics and teaching: Dynamics of the high school algebra classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.
   Google Scholar
• Christie, F. (2002). Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. London, UK: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Cobb, P., Gresalfi, M., & Hodge, L.L. (2009). An interpretive scheme for analyzing the identities that students develop in mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(1), 40–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, D.K. (2011). Teaching and its predicaments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, E.G. (1994a). Designing groupwork: Strategies for the heterogeneous classroom (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teacher College.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, E.G. (1994b). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64, 1–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, E.G. (1998). Making cooperative learning equitable. Educational Leadership, 56(1), 18–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, E.G., Lotan, R.A., & Leechor, C. (1989). Can classrooms learn? Sociology of Education, 62(2), 75–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cos, D.F., & Degner, K.M. (2012). Teaching through problem solving. The Mathematics Teacher, 105(6), 455–459.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, N.E. (1990a). Cooperative learning in mathematics: A handbook for teachers. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson, N.E. (1990b). Small group cooperative learning in mathematics. In T.J. Cooney & C.R. Hirsch (Eds.), Teaching and Learning Mathematics, 1990, Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 52–61). Reston, VA: NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• DeJarnette, A.F. (2014). Students’ conceptions of trigonometric functions and positioning practices during pair work with Etoys (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). Retrieved from https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/49404
   Google Scholar
• Dietiker, L., Kysh, J., Sallee, T., & Hoey, B. (2006). Algebra connections. Sacramento, CA: College Preparatory Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Eggins, S., & Slade, D. (1997). Analysing casual conversation. London, UK: Cassell.
   Google Scholar
• Engle, R.A., & Conant, F.R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399–483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esmonde, I. (2009a). Ideas and identities: Supporting equity in cooperative mathematics learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 1008–1043.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esmonde, I. (2009b). Mathematics learning in groups: Analyzing equity in two cooperative activity structures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(2), 247–284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Featherstone, H., Crespo, S., Jilk, L., Oslund, J., Parks, A., & Wood, M. (2011). Smarter together! Collaboration and equity in the elementary math classroom. Reston, VA: NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• González, G. (2013). Teachers’ choices when launching a geometry problem. Unpublished Manuscript.
   Google Scholar
• González, G., & DeJarnette, A. (2012). Agency in a geometry review lesson: A linguistic view on teacher and student division of labor. Linguistics and Education, 23(2), 182–199.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, M.A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London, UK: Hodder Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Henningsen, M., & Stein, M.K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 524–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbel-Eisenmann, B.A., & Otten, S. (2011). Mapping mathematics in classroom discourse. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(5), 451–485.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst, P. (2003). Using novel tasks in teaching mathematics: Three tensions affecting the work of the teacher. American Education Research Journal, 40(1), 197–238.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst, P. (2006). Teaching geometry with problems: Negotiating instructional situations and mathematical tasks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(4), 313–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst, P., & Brach, C. (2006). Proving and “doing proofs” in high school geometry classes: What is “it” that is going on for students? Cognition and Instruction, 24(1), 73–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst, P., Nachlieli, T., & Chazan, D. (2011). Studying the practical rationality of mathematics teaching: What goes into “installing” a theorem in geometry? Cognition and Instruction, 29(2), 218–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K.B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., … Stigler, J. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study, NCES (2003-013). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C.E., & Barrows, H.S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, I.S. (2005). Learning on the job: A situated account of teacher learning in two high school mathematics departments. Cognition & Instruction, 23(2), 207–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horn, I.S. (2012). Strength in numbers: Collaborative learning in secondary mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Jadallah, M., Anderson, R.C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Miller, B.W., Kim, I., Kuo, L., … Wu, X. (2011). Influence of a teacher's scaffolding moves during child-led small-group discussions. American Educational Research Journal, 48(1), 194–230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1991). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Kolodner, J.L., Camp, P.J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., … Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495–547.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koole, T., & Elbers, E. (2014). Responsiveness in teacher explanations: A conversation analytical perspective on scaffolding. Linguistics and Education, 26(1), 57–69.
   Google Scholar
• Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale.
   Google Scholar
• Lappan, G., Fey, J.T., Fitzgerald, W.M., Friel, S.N., & Phillips, E.D. (2005). Connected mathematics project. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1984). Action, context, and meaning [Monograph]. In Monographs, Working Papers, and Prepublications of the Toronto Semiotic Circle: Vol. 2. Semiotics and Education (pp. 63–93). Toronto, Canada: Victoria University.
   Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Westport, CT: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Love, K., & Suherdi, D. (1996). The negotiation of knowledge in an adult English as a second language classroom. Linguistics and Education, 8, 229–267.
   Google Scholar
• Lubienski, S.T. (2000). Problem solving as a means toward mathematics for all: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 454–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, J.R. (1985). Process and text: Two aspects of human semiosis. In J.D. Benson & W.S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic perspectives on discourse: Selected theoretical papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop (Advances in Discourse Processes 15) (pp. 248–274). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J.R. (1992). English text: System and structure. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.). London, UK: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Moschkovich, J.N. (2008). “I went by twos, he went by one”: Multiple interpretations of inscriptions as resources for mathematical discussions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 551–587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathan, M.J., & Kim, S. (2009). Regulation of teacher elicitations in the mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 91–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nathan, M.J., & Knuth, E. (2003). A study of whole classroom mathematical discourse and teacher change. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 175–207.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century (Committee on Defining Deeper Learning and 21st Century Skills, Board on Testing and Assessment and Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education). Washington DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Connor, M.C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp. 63–103). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Donnell, M. (1999). Context in dynamic modeling. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Text and context in functional linguistics (pp. 63–99). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175.
   Google Scholar
• Palincsar, A.S. & Brown, A.L. (1986). Interactive teaching to promote independent learning from text. The Reading Teacher, 39(8), 771–777.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petitto, A.L. (1985). Division of labor: Procedural learning in teacher-led small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 2(3&4), 233–270.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pontecorvo, C. (1993). Forms of discourse and shared thinking. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3/4), 189–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posamentier, A., & Salkind, C. (1970). Challenging problems in geometry. New York, NY: Macmillan Company.
   Google Scholar
• Ridlon, C. (2009). Learning mathematics via problem-centered approach: A two-year study. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(4), 188–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4, 209–229.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, J. (1992). Lectures on conversation (G. Jefferson ed., Vol. 2). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld, A. (1983). Beyond the purely cognitive: Belief systems, social cognitions, and metacognitions as driving forces in intellectual performance. Cognitive Science 7, 329–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepard, L.A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14.
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, L.A. (2005). Linking formative assessment to scaffolding. Educational Leadership, 63(3), 66–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair, J.M., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse. London, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Staples, M. (2007). Supporting whole-class collaborative inquiry in a secondary mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 25(2), 161–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein, M.K., Boaler, J., & Silver, E. (2003). Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Research perspectives. In H. Schoen (Ed.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving, grades 6–12 (pp. 245–256). Reston, VA: NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, C.A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 344–364.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabak, I., & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 393–429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ventola, E. (1987). The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters. London, UK: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, N.M., & Farivar, S.H. (1994). Promoting helping behavior in cooperative small groups in middle school mathematics. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 369–395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wells, G. (1993). Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in classroom. Linguistics and Education, 5, 1–37.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G. (1994). Discourse as a tool in the activity of learning and teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• Wells, G., & Mejía-Arauz, R. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams, S.R., & Baxter, J.A. (1996). Dilemmas of discourse-oriented teaching in one middle school mathematics classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 97(1), 21–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, D., Bruner, J.S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood, T. (1998). Funneling or focusing? Alternative patterns of communication in mathematics class. In H. Steinbring, M.G. Bartolinie-Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp. 167–178). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, T., Williams, G., & McNeal, B. (2006). Children's mathematical thinking in different classroom cultures. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(1), 222–255.
   Google Scholar