On Reform Movement and the Limits of Mathematical Discourse

By Anna Sfard. 2000

175 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Human Factors and Ergonomics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6584214d4547eeb878fde0ed917401e5f41a95d3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Human Factors and Ergonomics

Citations in the corpus

Educational forms of initiation in mathematical culture (2001, background): “A similar and even more detailed analysis of this very same viewpoint is given by Sfard (2000).”
Learning About Statistical Covariation (2003, background): “In contrast, sociomathematical norms focus on regularities in classroom actions and interactions that are specific to mathematics (Hershkowitz & Schwartz, 1999; McClain & Cobb, 2001a; Sfard, 2000a; Simon & Blume, 1996; Voigt, 1995; Yackel & Cobb, 1996).”
An Analysis of Development of Sociomathematical Norms in One First-Grade Classroom (2001, background): “Sociomathematical norms differ from general social norms that constitute the classroom participation structure in that they concern the normative aspects of classroom actions and interactions that are specifically mathematical (Hershkowitz & Schwartz, 1999; Lampert, 1990; Simon & Blume, 1996; Sfard,”
Reasoning With Tools and Inscriptions (2002, background): “Given this interest, anappropriatean- 1As Sfard (2000) observed, meaning sometimes is equated with the way that symbols are used.”
Ontological Innovation and the Role of Theory in Design Experiments (2004, background): “Several researchers have conducted related investigations and have identified a number of additional sociomathematical norms (e.g., Hershkowitz & Schwartz, 1999; Sfard, 2000; Simon & Blume, 1996).”
Key Ideas: What are they and how can they help us understand how people view proof? (2003, background): “) Proof has also been described as a part of a discourse practice (Sfard 2000), with a distinction being made between discourse with oneself (in the case of trying to produce a proof) and discourse with others (in the case of trying to communicate a proof to someone else)(1).”
Beyond motivation: history as a method for learning meta-discursive rules in mathematics (2011, background): “Learning is viewed as “becoming a participant in a certain discourse” where discourse “refers to the totality of communicative activities, as practiced by a given community” (Sfard, 2000, p. 160).”
A model of reading comprehension of geometry proof (2008, background): “speaking may be taken to an absurd extreme if teachers ignore the gap between mathematical rigor and students’ intuitions (Harel and Sowder 1998; Sfard 2000).”
When the Rules of Discourse Change, but Nobody Tells You: Making Sense of Mathematics Learning From a Commognitive Standpoint (2007, background): “…exactly the same as the ones that find their expression in the acceptance of axioms of numerical field as a basis for any further decision, and they must be accepted, possibly in a tacit way prior to any justification (see also Sfard, 2000a). mathematical discourse as imposed by the world itself.”
There is more to discourse than meets the ears: Looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning (2001, methodology): “For more details see Sfard and Kieran, 2001a, Sfard, 2000b. 11.”
An evaluation of the Supplemental Instruction programme in a first year calculus course (2008, background): “mathematical knowledge is thus improved by making meaning through processes of social interaction and language [13–20].”