Commentary on Theories of Mathematics Education

Modalities of a Local Integration of Theories in Mathematics Education 549
can actually be understood as theory development, islikelytobeamatterofinstitutionalisation
of discourses. Howsoever this question is answered, by the local
integration of a semiotic and a structuralist perspective a new and different gaze for
the topos of explicitness in mathematics instruction has been developed.
Bricolage and mutual metaphorical structuring show different effects on the theoretical
components that become locally integrated. This is still a complex issue and
it might be very useful to further develop a meta-language for the connection of theoretical
perspectives. I am convinced that a systematic description of the organising
principles of theory connection is an essential part of this developing language.
References
Bergsten, C., & Jablonka, E. (2009). Interpreting students’ reasoning through the lens of two different
languages of description: integration of juxtaposition? Paper presented at the Sixth Conference
of European Research in Mathematics Education, January 28 to February 1, 2009, Lyon,
France.
Bernstein, B. (1990). The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.
Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. London: Taylor & Francis.
Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of
Education, 20(2), 157–173.
Bourne, J. (2004). Framing talk: Towards a ‘radical visible pedagogy’. In J. Muller, B. Davis, &
A. Morais (Eds.), Reading Bernstein, Researching Bernstein (pp. 61–74). London: Routledge
Falmer.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer.
Cobb, P. (2007). Putting philosophy to work: Coping with multiple theoretical perspectives. In
F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp.
3–38). Greenwich: Information Age.
Cooper, B., & Dunne, M. (2000). Assessing Children’s Mathematical Knowledge. Social Class,
Sex and Problem Solving. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Dowling, P. (1998). The Sociology of Mathematics Education. Mathematical Myths/Pedagogic
Texts. London: Routledge Falmer.
Ernest, P. (2006). A semiotic perspective of mathematical activity: The case of number. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 61, 67–101.
Ernest, P. (2008). Opening the mathematics text: What does it say? In E. de Freitas & K. Nolan
(Eds.), Opening the Research Text. Critical Insights and In(ter)ventins Into Mathematics Education
(pp. 65–80). New York: Springer.
Gellert, U. (2008). Validity and relevance: Comparing and combining two sociological perspectives
on mathematics classroom practice. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics
Education, 40(2), 215–224.
Gellert, U., & Hümmer, A.-M. (2008). Soziale Konstruktion von Leistung im Unterricht. Zeitschrift
für Erziehungswissenschaft, 11, 288–311.
Gellert, U., & Jablonka, E. (2009). I am not talking about reality. Word problems and the intricacies
of producing legitimate text. In L. Verschaffel, B. Greer, W. Van Dooren, & S. Mukhopadhyay
(Eds.), Words and Worlds: Modelling Verbal Descriptions of Situations. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands: Sense; in press.
Gorgorió, N., Planas, N., & Vilella, X. (2002). Immigrant children learning mathematics in mainstream
schools. In G. de Abreu, A. J. Bishop, & N. C. Presmeg (Eds.), Transitions Between
Contexts of Mathematical Practices (pp. 23–52). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.