Mathematical

Conversations to

Transform
Algebra Class

Three topics worthy of classroom discussions help beginning algebra students

create meaning and build understanding as a community.
Jennifer Earles Szydlik

We dont see things as they are. We see things as we

are.
Anas Nin

magine your beginning algebra class. Together

you and your students engage in making
sense of notation, representations, and terms.
Your students watch youand one another
covertly to see what makes an acceptable question, what strategies are valued, what pictures and
symbols mean and how they are used, how mathematics is written and discussed, and how to justify
a solution. These hidden regularities . . . become
the taken-for-granted ways of interacting that
constitute the culture of doing mathematics in your
class (Wood 1998, p. 170).
Classroom culture is established through both
conversations and practices. Traditionally in mathematics class, we focus primarily on the latter; that
is, we show our students what doing mathematics looks like and then ask that they try it them-

mean
selves. In this article, I suggest three mathematical
conversations that help bring covertand often
ineffectualmeanings into the light. The process I
describe, sometimes called interrogating meaning,
allows students to make explicit their assumptions about how, when, and for what purpose a
mathematical notation, representation, or term is
used (Rosebery et al. 2005). In other words, these
conversations can help students recognize the
strengths and weaknesses of their own interpretations and give them agency in changing them. Further, they allow us as teachers a window into our
students thinking.
Each mathematical conversation begins with
a question for your class to ponder and discuss. I
will describe some typical student thinking about
each question and suggest some ways to build on
students ideas. Each topic has been addressed in
the classroom with students at a variety of levels
and makes a powerful point about mathematical
culture.

656 MATHEMATICS TEACHER | Vol. 108, No. 9 May 2015

Copyright 2015 The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc. www.nctm.org. All rights reserved.
This material may not be copied or distributed electronically or in any other format without written permission from NCTM.

precise

ning

representations

approximate

symbols
explicit

quantify
unique
for all

clarify
true-or-false

interpret at most
definitions

communicate

distinct

rephrasing

context

language

alternative
discuss
notation
there exists

rules

equality
yes-or-no

CONVERSATION 1: THE EQUALS SIGN

 he equals sign, =, signifies that two quantities
T
are the same. It does not mean write the
answer.
During the first week of my algebra classes, I
write the problem shown in figure 1 on the board
and ask that everyone decide, without talking to
one another, what numbers go in the blanks. Then
we discuss their ideas.
More than ninety percent of upper elementary school students will interpret = as write the
answer to the preceding computation and will
fill in the blanks with 19 and 25 (Falkner, Levi,
and Carpenter 1999). At the university level, a
majority of students in introductory mathematics
courses, such as college algebra, mathematics for
elementary school teachers, and liberal arts mathematics, will also respond with 19 and 25 (Szydlik,
Kuennen, and Seaman 2009), so it is a good bet
that your beginning algebra students harbor this
alternative conception about the meaning of the
equals sign. This interpretation is not consistent
with that of the mathematical community, but it is
not objectively incorrect. We could have decided
as a mathematical culture that = means write the
answer. However, we did not, and we had important reasons for defining equality the way that we
did. Equality is a fundamental mathematical relationship between quantities signifying that these
quantities are exactly the same. Students need to be
told all this explicitly and helped to understand that
meaning.
Carpenter, Franke, and Levi (2003) recommend
that elementary school teachers pose number sentences in ways that better reveal limitations of the
write the answer interpretation. For example,
a teacher might write equations in a variety of
forms
___ = 4 + 7
3 + ___ = 12
8 + 4 = 5 + ___
and ask students what values make the equations
true. Those of us who teach algebra might take a
similar tact before formally solving an equation. For
example, after making the point that equality is
a relationship between two numbers, I will write
something like 2x = x2 3 and ask, What values
What numbers go in the blanks?
12 + 7 = ____ + 6 = ____
Fig. 1 What does the equals sign mean?

658 MATHEMATICS TEACHER | Vol. 108, No. 9 May 2015

of x make this equation true? Can you find any

without writing anything down? Then, when we
discuss algebraic moves that will help find solutions, I can reinforce for my students that the point
of algebraic manipulation is to give us exactly those
moves that allow us to preserve equality.
I find a conversation about equality particularly
valuable when my students use the equals symbol
to mean something like and then I did this . . .
during the course of performing a series of algebraic
steps. For example, a student solving for a semicircular area in which she needs to first square the
circles radius, then multiply by p, and then divide
by 2 might write something like this: A = 42 = 16 =
16 = 16 /2= 8 .
In a class in which we have had an equality
conversation, the student and I might have this
exchange:
Teacher: What did you mean here when you wrote
16 = 16 ?
Audrey: I was showing all my steps. First, I
squared the 4, and then I multiplied by .
Teacher: So in this calculation, = means and then
I did this. . . .
Audrey: [laughs] And then I did that and that.
Teacher: I get it. But looking at this, remember that
I would think you meant that 16 is exactly the
same quantity as 16 . And that might even lead
me to solve for and think that = 1.
Audrey: How would you think that? Oh, I see.
Youd divide both sides of 16 = 16 by 16.
Teacher: [nods] Algebra is about all the things
you can do that keep two sides of an equation
balanced, and mathematicians have decided to
use the equals sign to show that balance. It is
important to write mathematics in a way that is
consistent with that meaning. It gives you power
in organizing your work, and it allows you to
communicate with others who are learning the
language of algebra. How could you change what
you wrote so that it made sense to me?
The focus here is not on the student being
wrong. Rather, I acknowledge that the student did
have a meaning for the symbol, that her meaning
made some sense, but that she will not be able to
effectively communicate her thinking in the language of algebra unless she adopts the mathematical
culture.

CONVERSATION 2: REPRESENTATIONS
 epresentations do not carry meaning. People
R
bring the meaning.
I ask each student to take a minute to make up
a mathematical meaning for the representation

shown in figure 2. Then I solicit a variety of ideas.

What follows is a typical start of a discussion.
Teacher: What do you see in this picture?
[Fifteen seconds or more of wait time]
Sara: I see a side view of a three-dimensional
house.
Teacher: Do you mean the white part?
Sara: Uh-huh. You might get the view from the
different sides and have to imagine the whole
house.
Richard: Ive seen those types of problems before.
Iiona: I see that. But I was picturing it [as] just the
fraction 5/12.
Teacher: Okay. How did you see that?
Iiona: Five white squares out of the total of twelve
squares.
Teacher: Who else saw that fraction? [Several
hands are raised; many students see fraction representations by what is not shaded rather than
by what is shaded.] Did anyone see the fraction
7/12? [Hands are raised.] Either one is reasonable, right? So I guess when we make pictures of
fractions, we should say whether we are looking
at the shaded part or the unshaded part. Other
ideas?
Charlotte: Could it be the fraction 5/7?
Iiona: No. That would mean 5 out of 7, and it is 5
out of 12.
Charlotte: I mean 5 white and 7 shaded.
Teacher: So you are thinking of the ratio 5 white
to 7 shaded [writing on board: 5:7]. Maybe we
could write it like this? Does this seem okay to
you, Iiona?
[Iiona nods.]
Teacher: The big point here might be that this picture has lots of reasonable mathematical interpretations. There is not just one correct way to
see it. When we make a representation, we need
to talk about what it means for that particular
problem or situation. Can anybody think of
another possible meaning for this picture?
Diego: It could be an area model for a probability
problem.
Teacher: Ah. Can anyone come up with a problem
for which that picture would be a model?
I have heard all these responses (depending in
part on the current content of the class in which
the question was posed) and lots of others too. For
example, students have said that the picture shows
12 5 = 3 + 4. That it is the number 17 (on a digital
clock). That it suggests the expression (3 4) 5.
That it is showing that 3/12 + 4/12 = 7/12. That it
shows an impossible net for an open box.
The idea that representations do not carry
meaning is not new. In the 1980s, researchers

Fig. 2 What mathematics might this picture represent?

published empirical studies showing that even

standard mathematical representations have
many viable interpretations (Schipper 1982; Feller
1983; Radatz 1986). For example, when Schipper
asked 109 first-grade children to interpret pictorial
representations (like that shown in fig. 2) from
standard first-grade mathematics textbooks, he
found that about a third of the children gave alternative meanings to pictures that had (or were similar to those that had) been used in their classes;
another third declined to attempt a representation.
Thompson (1994) suggested that without
awareness of alternative meanings, teachers may
assume that students see what we intend for them
to see, and he warns that communication can
break down when students see something other
than what we intend. Conversation 2 gives me the
opportunity to see and validate many student conceptions and to acknowledge that representations
require clarification. It also lets me explicitly tell
students that if they do not understand what a picture or symbol represents in a particular context,
or if they are seeing something
different in a representation,
they need to bring this to the
attention of the class. We talk
about the fact that pictures,
diagrams, and symbols can have
many reasonable meanings and
that it is our job as a class to
make sure that we discuss and
agree on what representations
mean. Having an alternative
conception does not imply that
the student is wrong or bad at
mathematics. Pictures do not
carry one correct meaning.
Bauersfeld (1995) argued
that these types of conversations about alternative conceptions can help students build
groundwork for future mathematics. As soon as we narrow
the students interpretations

Allow students to
argue why a certain
interpretation may
be valuable in one
context and to
create scenarios
that may be useful in
future mathematical
contexts.

Vol. 108, No. 9 May 2015 | MATHEMATICS TEACHER 659

of pictures and situations toward an unequivocal

ascription of mathematical meaning, he warns,
we throw away the opportunity for an early and
powerful preparation for later problem solving
(p. 146). So not only does this conversation give
students opportunities to describe their thinking,
but it also allows them to argue why a certain
interpretation may be valuable in one context,
whereas another interpretation may be valuable in
another, and to create scenarios (such as the probability model problem) that may be useful in future
mathematical contexts.

CONVERSATION 3:
MATHEMATICAL LANGUAGE
 athematicians have agreed on precise meanM
ings for words. Pay careful attention to their
language.
Many students do not appreciate the subtleties
of mathematical talk. As part of a research study
(Szydlik, Kuennen, and Seaman 2009), we posed
the item shown in figure 3 to a large sample of
college students in their beginning mathematics
class (such as college algebra, mathematics for
elementary teachers, or liberal arts mathematics).
Try it with your students as a way to begin a conversation about how mathematicians use language.
Only approximately half the students in our
study responded in a way that is consistent with
the interpretation of the mathematical communitythat neither (a) nor (b) need be true. Students who chose (b), the most common alternative
response, argued that if you are talking about
people in a pool, there must be someone in the
pool. This led us to question the precision with
which students attend to language and, specifically, the meanings that students may be giving
to statements containing quantifiers (e.g., for all,
there exists), quantifying language (e.g., at least,
at most, exactly), and words such as unique, distinct, and, and or.
Precise statements are a hallmark of algebra.
Algebraic identities are those statements that are

There are at most ten people in the swimming pool.

Assuming that this statement is true, which of the following
statements must also be true?
(a) There are ten people in the swimming pool.
(b) There is at least one person in the swimming pool.
(c) Both of the statements (a) and (b) must be true.
(d) Neither of the statements (a) and (b) need be true.
Fig. 3 How do mathematicians use language?

660 MATHEMATICS TEACHER | Vol. 108, No. 9 May 2015

true in all cases (e.g., for all x and for all y, (x + y)2
= x2 + 2xy + y2 ). When we solve an equation, we
are implicitly thinking, If there exists a solution,
x, then I could do all these moves to find it. We
might tell students that two distinct lines in the
plane can intersect at most once or that a cubic
equation has at least one real root. When talking
about solving an inequality, we may explain that
x > 7 or x < 7. But what do students make of this
language? First, we need to ask them. Second, we
need to share explicitly the mathematical culture
regarding the precision of our language.
Some researchers have found that revoicing
(repeating or rephrasing) student talk can help
students clarify ideas, learn mathematical vocabulary, or attend to specific words and their meanings (OConnor and Michaels 1993). In my algebra
classes, I look for opportunities to amplify words
by emphasizing their importance when revoicing
student talk and by emphasizing them in my own
speaking. Revoicing might sound something like
this:
Aidos: I got x is bigger than 7 and x is less than
negative 7.
Teacher: [to the class] Aidos says x is bigger than 7
and x is less than negative 7. [short pause] Hmm.
Give me a number that x could be.
Violet: 10.
Teacher: Okay, then 10 has to satisfy Aidoss statement. Lets read it with 10 in there. Ten is bigger
than 7 and 10 is less than negative 7.
[Five seconds of silence]
Aidos: I meant that it just has to be one or the
other.
Violet: So it should be x is bigger than 7 or less than
negative 7?
Teacher: Yes. Then you are saying that all values
of x that are bigger than, greater than, 7 along
with all values of x that are less than negative
seven make the inequality true.
I also share with students, through stories, mathematical culture regarding language. For example, I
explain that if a mathematician has six children and
you ask whether she has three children (in the context of mathematicsand probably outside it too),
she will answer in the affirmative, because if she
has six children, then she also has three children. I
tell them that my father (a mathematician too) will
respond to and-or questions with either yes or no. I
learned quite young that if I asked him if he wanted
peas or beans at dinner, he would simply say yes.
(I am delighted when students adopt this language
and start to answer my questions in that manner.
Teacher: True or false? (x + y)2 = x2 + y2? Class:
Yes.) Stories like these give us opportunities

to share meanings that mathematicians give to

language.

OPENING GAMBITS
The types of conversations described here pay
high mathematical dividends for the class time
invested. They allow us to hear student thinking
about mathematical symbols, representations,
and language and share meanings given to these
objects by the mathematical community. They
provide teachers and students opportunities to
lay groundwork for future problem solving and to
discuss larger mathematical values and practices.
In addition, they specifically address the Common
Core Standards for Mathematical Practice regarding attention to precision: Mathematically proficient students try to communicate precisely to
others. They try to use clear definitions in discussion with others and in their own reasoning. They
state the meaning of the symbols they choose,
including using the equals sign consistently and
appropriately (CCSSI 2010, pp. 7).
Further, the conversations encourage contributions from students who may have been reticent
to engage because they allow us to validate their
different ways of seeing mathematical objects.
In other words, these types of discussion can
enhance the culture of participation in our classrooms because they allow us to shift the notion
that mathematical rules are based on the teachers
authority to a more inclusive and empowering
view in which mathematical understanding is
developed by a community of learners.
This is not to say that three conversations are
sufficient; changing classroom norms is an ongoing project. The practice of interrogating meaning
of symbols, representations, and terms must be
ongoing if this type of participation is to become
the norm. These conversations are meant to serve
as openings to begin that transformation.

REFERENCES
Bauersfeld, Heinrich. 1995. The Structuring of
Structures: Development and Function of Mathematizing as a Social Practice. In Constructivism
in Education, edited by Leslie Steffe and Jerry
Gale, pp. 13758. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Carpenter, Thomas P., Megan Loef Franke, and Linda
Levi. 2003. Thinking Mathematically: Integrating Arithmetic and Algebra in Elementary School.
Heinemann: Portsmouth, NH.
Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI).
2010. Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of
Chief State School Officers. http://www

.corestandards.org/wp-content/uploads/Math_
Standards.pdf.
Falkner, Karen, Linda Levi, and Thomas Carpenter.
1999. Childrens Understanding of Equality: A
Foundation for Algebra. Teaching Children Mathematics 6 (4): 23236.
Feller, Gisela. 1983. Diagnosis and Analysis of Mathematics Achievement in Elementary School. Frankfurt
am Main, Germany: Peter Lang Verlag.
OConnor, Mary Catherine, and Sarah Michaels.
1993. Aligning Academic Task and Participation
Status through Revoicing: Analysis of a Classroom
Discourse Strategy. Anthropology and Education
Quarterly 24 (4): 31835.
Radatz, Henrik. 1986. Graphical Representations
and Understanding of Subject Matter in Teaching Mathematics at the Elementary Level. In
Beitrage zum Mathematikunterricht, pp. 23942.
Hildesheim, Germany: Franzbecker.
Rosebery, Ann, Beth Warren, Cynthia Ballenger, and
Mark Ogonowsk. 2005. The Generative Potential
of Students Everyday Knowledge in Learning Science. In Understanding Mathematics and Science
Matters, edited by Thomas Romberg, Thomas
Carpenter, and Fae Dremock, pp. 5580. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schipper, Wilhelm. 1982. Selection and Order of
Mathematical Content in the Early Grades. Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik 2: 91120.
Szydlik, Jennifer E., Eric Kuennen, and Carol E.
Seaman. 2009. Development of an Instrument to
Measure Mathematical Sophistication. In Proceedings for the Twelfth Conference of the MAAs Special
Interest Group on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (SIGMAA on RUME). http://
www.rume.org/crume2009/Szydlik_LONG.pdf
Thompson, Patrick W. 1994. Concrete Materials and
Teaching for Mathematical Understanding. Arithmetic Teacher 41 (9): 55658.
Wood, Terry. 1998. Alternative Patterns of Communication in Mathematics Classes: Funneling
or Focusing? In Language and Communication
in the Mathematics Classroom, edited by Heinz
Steinbring, Maria Bartolini Bussi, and Anna
Sierpinska, pp. 16778. Reston, VA: National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

JENNIFER EARLES SZYDLIK, szydlik@

uwosh.edu, is a faculty member at the
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. She
teaches a variety of mathematics courses
for future teachers and especially enjoys working
with practicing teachers in their classrooms.
PHOTOGRAPH: SHAWN MacAFEE; ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Vol. 108, No. 9 May 2015 | MATHEMATICS TEACHER 661