MuradJurdak

Learning and
Teaching Real
World Problem
Solving in School
Mathematics
A Multiple-Perspective Framework for
Crossing the Boundary
Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics
Murad Jurdak

Learning and Teaching

Real World Problem Solving
in School Mathematics
A Multiple-Perspective Framework
for Crossing the Boundary
Murad Jurdak
American University of Beirut
Beirut, Lebanon

ISBN 978-3-319-08203-5 ISBN 978-3-319-08204-2 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2

Library of Congress Control Number: 2016937978

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microlms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specic statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the
editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors
or omissions that may have been made.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland
To my grandchildren Sophie and Marc
for having given me the hope and strength
to pursue this book
Preface

Learning and Teaching Real world Problem Solving in School Mathematics: A

Multiple-Perspective Framework for Crossing the Boundary is, to a considerable
extent, a response to the widening divide between mathematics as practiced in
schools and mathematics as enacted in social and workplace practices. School
mathematics is generally viewed as a series of academic hurdles that students need
to overcome in order to move up to the next level, whereas in the real world outside
the school, whether in the course of daily life or in the workplace, individuals
encounter situations in which they are called upon to deal with mathematical pro-
cesses that are black-boxed, i.e., hidden in automated machines or other symbolic
systems. However, decoding, interpreting, and using the black-boxed mathematics
in social and workplace contexts are complex processes that involve problem solv-
ing. In this context, school mathematics and real world problem solving seem to be
becoming increasingly two disconnected social worlds separated by a growing
thick, nonporous boundary. The thesis of this book is that the crossing of the bound-
ary between the two disconnected social worlds of school mathematics and real
world problem solving is essential to reclaim school mathematics as a tool to prac-
tice real world problem solving.
The ultimate aim of this book is to identify the conceptual tools and the instruc-
tional modalities which enable students and teachers to cross the boundary between
school mathematics and real world problem solving. The book identies, examines,
and integrates seven conceptual tools, of which ve are constructs (activity theory,
narrative, modeling, critical mathematics education, ethnomathematics) and two are
contexts (STEM and the workplace) in order to develop two closely linked multiple-
perspective frameworks: one for learning real world problem solving in school
mathematics, which sets the foundations of learning real world problem solving in
school mathematics; and one for teaching real world problem solving in school
mathematics, which explores the modalities of teaching real world problem solving
in school mathematics.
An assumption that underlies this book is the centrality of human agency of
teachers and students in the learning/teaching process. The multiple-perspective
learning and teaching frameworks are more of an invitation than a prescription.

vii
viii Preface

They are an invitation to a menu of instructional strategies from which students,

teachers, and schools can choose. The choices can vary from simple strategies that
can be embedded in regular classroom problem solving activities to more involved
capstone projects that require favorable policies, adequate resources, and commit-
ted and motivated teachers. In summary, teacher agency in choosing, implementing,
and appropriating the level of adoption of the multiple-perspective framework for
teaching real world problem solving in school mathematics is central within the
available resources and constraints of the learning/teaching context.
One distinct feature of this book is the telling of the story in each chapter in two
types of discourse: the public and the personal. The public discourse tells the shared
and public story of known ideas related to real world problem solving in school
mathematics, while the personal discourse recounts the authors personal story of
events, people, and experiences that pertain to real world problem solving in school
mathematics. The narrative that I included in every chapter on my personal and
professional experiences as a student, teacher, or researcher has made explicit the
links between my public scholarly space represented by my publications and teach-
ing, and my private space represented by events, people, and experiences that helped
shape my public scholarly life.
The book consists of four parts. Part 1, entitled The Landscape, scans the theo-
retical landscape in which the issue of real world problem solving in school math-
ematics is situated and explores the relationships among the triad (real world,
school, and mathematics). Part 2, entitled The Perspectives, surveys and reviews
critically the literature on ve selected relevant theoretical constructs (activity the-
ory, narrative, modeling, critical mathematics education, and ethnomathematics)
and draws implications to learning and teaching real world problem solving in
school mathematics. Building on the identied implications, specic instructional
designs are suggested for interfacing school mathematics and real world problem
solving. Part 3, entitled The Contexts, explores the potential of the workplace and
STEM contexts for promoting learning and teaching real world problem solving in
school mathematics. Part 4, entitled The Framework, integrates the ve perspec-
tives and the two contexts into two multiple-perspective frameworks; one which sets
the foundations and principles of learning real world problem solving in school
mathematics, and another which explores the modalities of teaching real world
problem solving in school mathematics.
This book is primarily intended as a reference for scholars and graduate students
of mathematics education. It may also be used as a textbook for a graduate course
for a comprehensive overview of mathematics education. It also may inform prac-
ticing mathematics educators. It may, moreover, serve as general reading for indi-
viduals passionate about intellectual journeys.
This book draws on a rich repertoire of lifelong professional and personal experi-
ences which involved my students, colleagues, scholar friends, and family mem-
bers. To all of them I owe debt and deep gratitude. I specially want to acknowledge
the caring support of my wife, Muna, who generously provided the protected time
for me to pursue the demanding task of writing this book.
Preface ix

I would like to acknowledge those whose contribution was essential to the

completion of this book. I would like specially to acknowledge my university, the
American University of Beirut, for granting me a 1-year sabbatical leave to com-
plete this book. I also would like to acknowledge the generosity and superb scholar-
ship of my friend Mogens Niss, who enthusiastically read the manuscript and wrote
a beautiful and insightful introduction. Last but not least, I would like to acknowl-
edge with great appreciation the contribution of Ms. Samira Shami, who capably
and painstakingly provided a very careful copyediting of the manuscript.
This book is a narrative about a journey during which I experienced multiple
identity making/remaking, both as a person and a scholar. I sincerely hope that this
book faithfully tells the story of that journey.

Beirut, Lebanon Murad Jurdak

Contents

Part I The Landscape

1 What Is Real About the Real World?.................................................... 3

1.1 Four Epistemological Views of Reality ........................................... 3
1.2 Narratives Account of Reality Constitution .................................... 5
1.2.1 Paradigmatic Mode of Thought............................................ 5
1.2.2 Narrative Mode of Thought.................................................. 6
1.3 Activity-Theoretic Account of Reality Constitution ........................ 6
1.4 Narrative View of Culture ................................................................ 7
1.5 Activity-Theoretic View of Culture ................................................. 10
1.6 The World View ............................................................................... 12
1.7 School as a Moderator of Student Worldview.................................. 13
1.8 My Narrative About the Real World............................................. 14
References ................................................................................................. 16
2 School, Society, and Culture .................................................................. 19
2.1 Perspectives on Formal Schooling ................................................... 19
2.1.1 Formal Schooling from the Critical Perspective .................. 20
2.1.2 Formal Schooling from an Emancipatory Perspective ......... 20
2.1.3 Formal Schooling from the Social Mobility Perspective ..... 21
2.1.4 Formal Schooling from the Socialization Perspective ......... 22
2.1.5 Formal Schooling from the Deschooling Perspective .......... 22
2.1.6 Formal Schooling from the Personalized Perspective .......... 23
2.1.7 Formal Schooling from the Cultural Reproduction
Perspective............................................................................ 25
2.2 Use Value of Schooling .................................................................... 26
2.3 Pedagogic Modes of Acculturation .................................................. 27
2.4 My Narrative About School, Culture, and Society .......................... 28
References ................................................................................................. 31

xi
xii Contents

3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist? ................................................. 33

3.1 Perspectives on Literacy................................................................... 33
3.1.1 Autonomous Model of Literacy ........................................... 34
3.1.2 Ideological Model of Literacy .............................................. 34
3.1.3 Critical Literacy.................................................................... 35
3.1.4 Literacy as a Cultural Capital ............................................... 36
3.2 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist? ............................................. 37
3.3 Perspectives on Mathematical Literacy............................................ 38
3.3.1 Autonomous Mathematical Literacy .................................... 38
3.3.2 Ideological Mathematical Literacies .................................... 39
3.3.3 Critical Mathematical Literacy............................................. 40
3.3.4 Mathematical Literacy as a Cultural Capital ........................ 41
3.4 Mathematical Literacy in the UNESCOs Evolving
Notion of Literacy ............................................................................ 42
3.5 My Narrative About Mathematical Literacy .................................... 43
References ................................................................................................. 45

Part II The Perspectives

4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem

Solving in School Mathematics .............................................................. 49
4.1 Introduction ...................................................................................... 49
4.2 Development of Activity Theory ..................................................... 50
4.3 Perspectives on Activity Theory ...................................................... 52
4.3.1 Activity as a Psychological Process ..................................... 52
4.3.2 Activity as a Transformation Process ................................... 53
4.3.3 Activity as a Cultural Historical Process.............................. 53
4.3.4 Activity as a Systematic-Structural Process ......................... 53
4.4 Problem Solving from the Perspective of Activity Theory .............. 54
4.4.1 Real-World Problem Solving as an Individual Activity ....... 54
4.4.2 Real-World Problem Solving as a Collective Activity ......... 55
4.4.3 School Mathematics Problem Solving
as an Individual Activity ...................................................... 55
4.5 Contrasting Problem Solving in School Mathematics
and Real World ................................................................................. 57
4.6 Overview on Problem-Solving Research That Used
Activity Theory Framework ............................................................. 58
4.6.1 Social-Cultural Context ........................................................ 59
4.6.2 Workplace Context ............................................................... 60
4.6.3 STEM Context...................................................................... 61
4.7 Interfacing School Mathematics and Real-World
Problem Solving ............................................................................... 62
4.7.1 Alternative Conceptualizations of Interfacing
Interacting Activity Systems ................................................ 63
Contents xiii

4.8 Crossing the Boundary Between School Mathematics

and Real-World Problem Solving .................................................... 65
4.8.1 Boundary Crossing Construct .............................................. 65
4.8.2 Boundary Crossing in Educational Contexts ....................... 65
4.8.3 Boundary Objects ................................................................. 66
4.8.4 Boundary Crossing Between School Mathematics
and Real-World Problem Solving ........................................ 67
4.9 Boundary Objects Between School Mathematics
and Real-World Problem Solving .................................................... 69
4.9.1 Modeling .............................................................................. 69
4.9.2 Narrative Discourse .............................................................. 70
4.9.3 Critical Conception of Mathematics .................................... 71
4.9.4 Ethnomathematics ................................................................ 72
4.9.5 Mathematical Practices in the Workplace ............................ 72
4.9.6 Mathematical Practices in STEM......................................... 73
4.10 My Narrative: How I Was Drawn to Activity Theory ...................... 74
References ................................................................................................. 76
5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling ........ 79
5.1 Perspectives on Modeling ................................................................ 79
5.2 Modeling as a Mathematical Practice .............................................. 80
5.3 Modeling as an Epistemic Practice .................................................. 81
5.4 Modeling as a Sociocultural Practice ............................................... 81
5.5 Contrasting Modeling Practices in Real-World Problem
Solving and in School Mathematics Problem Solving..................... 82
5.5.1 Role of the Community of Practice ...................................... 85
5.5.2 Agency of the Human Subject ............................................. 85
5.5.3 The Visibility of Mathematics .............................................. 85
5.6 Modeling as an Interface Between Problem Solving
in School Mathematics and in the Real World ................................. 86
5.6.1 Recontextualizing Word Problems
as Modeling Activities ......................................................... 86
5.6.2 Interpreting Outputs of Black-Boxed Modeling .................. 87
5.6.3 Emergent Modeling .............................................................. 87
5.6.4 Model-Eliciting Activities .................................................... 88
5.7 My Story with Modeling .................................................................. 89
References ................................................................................................. 91
6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective
of the Narrative Mode of Thought......................................................... 93
6.1 Bruners Narrative Mode of Thought ............................................... 93
6.2 The Human-Making Experience as a Narrative ............................... 94
6.3 Mathematics-Making as a Narrative ................................................ 94
6.3.1 Example of a Mathematics-Making Narrative:
An Epistemological Drama .................................................. 95
6.3.2 Example of a Mathematics-Making
as a Life Experience ............................................................. 96
xiv Contents

6.4 Problem Solving as a Narrative ........................................................ 97

6.4.1 An Example of Problem Solving an Epistemological
Narrative: Polyas How to Solve It ................................... 98
6.4.2 Example of Problem Solving as a Life Narrative................. 99
6.4.3 Example of Problem Solving
as a Paradigmatic Thought ................................................... 100
6.5 Narrative as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School
Mathematics and in the Real World ................................................. 101
6.5.1 Polyas Expanded Framework of Problem Solving ............. 101
6.5.2 Journal Writing About Real-World Problem Solving .......... 103
6.5.3 Modeling Narratives ............................................................. 104
6.5.4 Historical Narratives About Mathematics-Making .............. 104
6.6 My Narrative About Narrative ......................................................... 104
References ................................................................................................. 106
7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective
of Critical Mathematics Education ....................................................... 109
7.1 Paulo Freires Emancipatory Education ........................................... 109
7.2 Critical Mathematics Education ....................................................... 110
7.3 Critical Mathematics Education in Practice: Possibilities
and Challenges ................................................................................. 112
7.4 Problem Solving as a Critical Mathematics Education Practice ...... 115
7.5 Critical Mathematics Education as an Interface
Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics
and in the Real World ....................................................................... 116
7.5.1 Critical Mathematics Education Project............................... 116
7.5.2 Critical Reection on Mathematical Practices ..................... 117
7.6 My Reection on Critical Mathematics Education .......................... 118
References ................................................................................................. 120
8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective
of Ethnomathematics .............................................................................. 121
8.1 Foundational Issues in Ethnomathematics ....................................... 121
8.2 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Mathematics Education .............. 123
8.3 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Critical
Mathematics Education .................................................................... 126
8.4 Ethnomathematical Practices and Mathematics Education.............. 127
8.5 Ethnomathematical Practices and Problem Solving ........................ 128
8.6 Ethnomathematics as an Interface Between Problem
Solving in School Mathematics and in the Real World ................... 129
8.6.1 Problematization of Ethnomathematical Practices............... 130
8.6.2 Exploration of Historical Culturally
Specic Problems ................................................................. 130
8.6.3 Student Ethnomathematical Research Project ..................... 131
8.7 My Narrative About Ethnomathematics .......................................... 131
References ................................................................................................. 133
Contents xv

Part III The Contexts

9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving.................. 137

9.1 Contrasting Practices in the School and the Workplace................... 137
9.2 Contrasting Problem Solving in the School
and in the Workplace ........................................................................ 140
9.3 Interfacing School and Workplace ................................................... 141
9.3.1 Boundary Crossing ............................................................... 141
9.3.2 Subjectication ..................................................................... 142
9.4 The Workplace Context as an Interface Between Problem
Solving in School Mathematics and in the Real World ................... 142
9.4.1 Workplace Routines as School Problems ............................. 143
9.4.2 Case Study Investigation ...................................................... 145
9.4.3 Joint SchoolWorkplace Focus Group ................................. 146
9.4.4 Technical Training Workshop .............................................. 146
9.5 My Narrative About Workplace Mathematics ................................. 147
References ................................................................................................. 148
10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving ...... 151
10.1 Overview of Perspectives on STEM Education ............................. 152
10.1.1 STEM Education as Literacy ............................................ 152
10.1.2 STEM Education as Pedagogy ......................................... 152
10.1.3 STEM Education as Curriculum ....................................... 154
10.2 Integrative Objects Among STEM Disciplines .............................. 156
10.2.1 Problem Solving ............................................................... 156
10.2.2 Design ............................................................................... 157
10.2.3 Real-World Oriented Goals .............................................. 158
10.3 Interfacing School-Mathematics Problem Solving
and STEM Disciplines to Cross ..................................................... 158
10.3.1 Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA) .................................... 159
10.3.2 STEM Project-Based Learning (PBL) .............................. 159
10.3.3 Mathematics Studio .......................................................... 159
10.4 My Narrative About STEM............................................................ 161
References ................................................................................................. 163

Part IV The Framework

11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics:

A Multiple-Perspective Framework ...................................................... 167
11.1 Zone A: Individual Learning Activity ............................................ 169
11.2 Zone A: Individual Learning of Problem Solving
in School Mathematics ................................................................... 171
11.3 Zone B: Collective Learning Problem Solving Activity
in School Mathematics ................................................................... 171
xvi Contents

11.4 A Proposed Multiple-Perspective Framework

for Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics (Zone C).................................................................... 172
11.4.1 Premises Underlying the Multiple-Perspective
Framework ........................................................................ 172
11.4.2 Boundary Objects in the Multiple-Perspective
Frame Work ...................................................................... 174
11.4.3 Learning Mechanisms at the Boundary ............................ 175
11.5 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework
for Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics ................................................................................... 175
11.6 My Narrative About Learning from Writing This Book ................ 177
References ................................................................................................. 179
12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics:
A Multiple-Perspective Framework ...................................................... 181
12.1 Paradigm Shifts in the Conception of Teaching ............................. 181
12.2 The Conception of Teaching from an Activity-Theoretical
Perspective ..................................................................................... 183
12.3 A Multiple-Perspective Framework for Teaching
Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics ................... 185
12.4 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework
for Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics ................................................................................... 186
12.5 Instructional Objectives of Teaching Real-World
Problem Solving in School Mathematics ....................................... 188
12.6 Vertical Sequencing Instruction in Real-World
Problem Solving in School Mathematics ....................................... 189
12.7 Horizontal Sequencing of Problem Tasks in Teaching
Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics ................... 190
12.8 Epilogue ......................................................................................... 193
References ................................................................................................. 195

Index .................................................................................................................. 197

Introduction

The present book, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics: A Multiple-Perspective Framework for Crossing the Boundary, is an
unusual, in fact a unique, book. It has been written by a great and wise cosmopolitan
scholar, researcher, and humanist with a multifaceted background in and knowledge
of diverse regions and cultures. I am proud to call Dr. Murad Jurdak my friend ever
after we met for the rst time in 1980, at an invited meeting in Paris organized by
UNESCOs legendary Programme Specialist of Mathematics Education, Dr. Ed
Jacobsen. Soon after, in the same year, we met at ICME-4 (The Fourth International
Congress on Mathematical Education), in Berkeley, California, where we spent
quite some time together outside the scientic program of the congress, discussing
issues of mathematics education along with the state and development of the world.
Since then, we have met when opportunities and timing allowed for it, at confer-
ences in different parts of the world, and we have corresponded from time to time
on various topics pertaining to the world and to mathematics education.
In April 2012 I had the privilege of being invited to the American University in
Beirut, Lebanon, to speak at a conference organized by Murad and colleagues. It
was a very interesting and eye-openingand, needless to say, pleasantexperience
to be shown around in Beirut by Murad as my most generous and hospitable expert
guide and host, and to visit him in his own habitat. On one occasion during my
visit, at a delicious and impressive lunch, Murad mentioned an idea to me that he
had pondered on for quite some time: to write or edit a book in which the coming
of age of mathematics education as a eld of research and development was viewed
in parallel to the coming of age of mathematics educators belonging to the very
same era in which mathematics education grew up and matured, roughly corre-
sponding to our common generation, his and mine.
I do not know to what extent the present book is actually a result of the ideas
Murad Jurdak aired to me that afternoon in 2012. If not a direct result of those
thoughts it is at least close to them in spirit. Forand herein lies one of the unique
features of the bookthe book is composed as, on the one hand, a high-level theo-
retical scholarly work on real world problem solving in school mathematics, and,
on the other hand, a set of 12 narratives which, put together, constitute a

xvii
xviii Introduction

thought-provoking and moving personal and professional autobiography of a man

who has come of age as an individual, as a former student of mathematics, as a
researcher in mathematics education of great international recognition (which he is,
though, far too modest to mention himself), as a teacher and a teacher educator, as
a consultant in the Arab world, and as a colleague and collaborator with a wide
range of different people around the world. These narratives, too, are composed in
a dual manner, in that they combine aspects of Murads personal trajectory as an
individual with those points in his professional career at which he became aware of
perspectives on and approaches to mathematics education that were both signicant
in and of themselves and instrumental for the specic scholarly endeavor presented
in the book which now lies before us.

***

Learning and Teaching Real World Problem Solving in School Mathematics: A

Multiple-Perspective Framework for Crossing the Boundary takes its point of depar-
ture in the deeply rooted discrepancy between real world problem solving and
school mathematics problem solving. Basically, the objective of this book is to
arrive at ways that would transform school problem solving practices to be more
embedded in real world problem solving (Chap. 4). Thus the book is no less than
an attemptpaying close attention to the triad: person, mind, cultureto establish
a full-edged framework for reconciling real world problem solving with school
mathematics problem solving and bringing the resulting allies into school math-
ematics teaching and learning in a viable manner, eventually leading to a coherent
theory of instruction, the ultimate goal of this book (Chap. 1). As a matter of fact,
the book ends up offering two closely linked multi-perspective frameworks, one for
learning real world problem solving in school mathematics (presented in Chap. 11)
and one for teaching real world problem solving in school mathematics (presented
in the last chapter, Chap. 12). Murad Jurdak makes an effort to stress that neither
framework is meant to be a prescription but an invitation: Rather, it is an open
framework for students and teachers to view real world problem solving in school
mathematics through diverse lenses, each of which is based on enough theoretical
and empirical knowledge to offer a distinct interpretation of learning real world
problem solving in school mathematics. (Chap. 11), Similar statements are made
for the teaching framework in Chap. 12.
The very headings of the 12 chapters in the book provide an excellent impression
of what the book is all about: (1) What Is Real About the Real World? (2) School,
Society, and Culture. (3) Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist? (4)the core theo-
retical chapter in the book: Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics. (5) Real World Problem Solving from the Perspective
of Modeling. (6) Real World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative
Mode of Thought. (7) Real World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Critical
Mathematics Education. (8) Real World Problem Solving from the Perspective of
Ethnomathematics. (9) Workplace as a Context for Real World Problem Solving.
(10) STEM Education as Context for Real World Problem Solving. (11)the rst of
Introduction xix

two culmination chapters: Learning Real World Problem Solving in School

Mathematics: A Multiple-Perspective Framework, and (12)the second culmination
chapter: Teaching Real World Problem Solving in School Mathematics: A Multiple-
Perspective Framework. Each chapter is equipped with an opening quotation from
a well-known scientist or scholar containing a position or an issue pertaining to the
chapter it introduces.
These chapters form the links of a chain which paves the way for the culmination
of the book, the dual framework for learning and teaching real world problem solv-
ing in school mathematics. Each chapter focuses on a particular issue or problma-
tique or on a theoretical concept or construct of potential signicance to the
exploration undertaken throughout the book. More often than not, terms and con-
cepts are given different meanings in the literature, and the author takes great care
in presenting these meanings and analyzing the differences between them. Murad
does his utmost to present fair and unbiased accounts of the positions taken by dif-
ferent scholars on these matters, before he ends up making his own choice of inter-
pretation or position which is argued for by invoking the goal and thrust of the book.
The chapters are based on extensive reading of a large and diverse body of scholarly
literature, much of which came to Murads knowledge only at relatively late points
in his academic career, which is one of the things we learn from his personal narra-
tives at the end of each chapter.
The key constructs adopted in the analytic and constructive exploration that con-
stitutes the book are Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) (Roth, Radford,
and LaCroix), based on work by Vygotsky, Leontev, and Engestrm, especially the
latters notion of activity system, developed further to interconnected activity sys-
tems, the notion of boundary object (Star and Griesemer) forming an actual or
potential bridge between two or more interconnected activity systems, and the
notion of boundary crossing (Akkerman and Bakker), also referred to in the title of
the book. Also Paolo Freires notion of emancipatory pedagogy, and one of its off-
springs, critical mathematics education, are crucial elements in the exposition.
Theseand otherconstructs are presented, analyzed, reviewed, and revisited
from a variety of perspectives throughout the book. This contributes to the strong
theoretical coherence of the scientic part of the book. Interestingly enough, this
coherence is mirrored in the narratives sections of the book, both because Murad
Jurdaks encounter with these constructs is described as part of his professional
journey and because this journey then is placed in an integrative light. As a matter
of fact, this is exactly the view taken by Murad himself in the epilogue of the book,
placed at the end of Chap. 12: If there is one word that epitomizes this journey, it
is the word integrationintegration at the personal, epistemological and discourse
levels.
To me, it has been a fascinating experience to read Murad Jurdaks book as well
as to write an introduction to it, both from a scholarly and a personal perspective.
Indeed, this is a unique book in several respects. I cannot help thinking that its rich-
ness in experiences, concerns, views, and deliberations reects fundamental charac-
teristics of the authors home country, the cosmopolitan, cultural, political, and
xx Introduction

religious melting pot called Lebanon, from time to time haunted by insurmountable
controversy, insane warfare and oppression, but always the home of great people
who eventually re-emerge from the hardship they have endured. I hope this work of
a great scholar and humanist will receive the large and multifaceted readership it
deserves. I want to thank Murad for having shared his open-mindedness, wisdom,
knowledge and insights, andnot leasthis personal narrative with us.

Roskilde University Mogens Niss

Roskilde, Denmark
 Part I
The Landscape
Chapter 1
What Is Real About the Real World?

A few years ago the city of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners
from keeping goldfish in curved goldfish bowls. The measures
sponsor explained the measure in part by saying it is cruel to
keep a fish in a bowl with curved sides because, gazing out, and
the fish would have a distorted view of realty. But how do we
know we have the true, undistorted picture of reality? Might not
we ourselves also be inside some big goldfish bowl and have our
vision distorted by an enormous lens? The goldfishs picture of
reality is different from ours, but can we be sure it is less real?
(Hawking & Mlodinow, 2010, p. 53)

Current psychological thinking often hypothesizes that the triad of person, mind,
and culture are constituents of human psychic reality (Lucariello, 1995). Person
refers to the human agent who constructs or establishes reality, mind refers to
human cognition, and culture refers to shared realities within a specic culture.
Vygotskys assertion (1978) that cultural products, like language and other sym-
bolic systems, mediate thought marked a shift in psychology from treating cogni-
tion and culture as separable to the view that cognition and culture are no longer
regarded as divisible (Lucariello, 1995, p. 1). However, the different denitions of
person, mind, and culture and the relations among them resulted in different psy-
chological approaches. This chapter introduces and discusses current well-known
accounts of the relationships among person, mind, and culture: narrative, activity
theory, and mathematical modeling. The chapter focuses on accounts of how these
theories constitute reality both individually and culturally as well as how the world
view of the student is moderated by the school.

1.1 Four Epistemological Views of Reality

The world as perceived by humans is inferred from the way individuals experience it
through their senses and know it through their minds. The world of an individual is not
separable from the worlds of others with whom the individual shares experiences and
knowledge. The study of how the human mind achieves real knowledge of the world
provides a window that allows us to access the real world of individuals and groups.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 3

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_1
4 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

The study of how the human mind achieves knowledge of the world and of how
it develops falls generally under the four epistemological strands of empiricist,
rationalist, constructivist traditions, and more recently model-dependent realism.
The empiricist view regards reality as experientially constituted. The empiricist
tradition focuses on the interplay of mind, through our senses, with the external
world of nature as the source of knowledge by establishing the association of sensa-
tions and ideas. Thus, sensory experience is the main source of our knowledge of
our sensed world. Empirical evidence is also the test for the truth of our knowledge.
Empiricism is fundamental to the scientic method that proclaims that all hypoth-
eses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world.
Empiricism is fundamental to understanding the world of nature in terms of causes,
predictions, and control.
The rationalist view regards reality as rationally constituted. The rationalist
believes that we come to knowledge a priorithrough the use of logicand our
knowledge is thus independent of sensory experience. Rationalism regards reason
as the chief source and test of knowledge. Thus, the criterion of the truth is intel-
lectual and deductive rather than sensory. Since rationalists believe that reality has
an intrinsically logical structure, they argue that certain truths exist and that the
intellect can directly grasp these truths. That is to say, rationalists assert that certain
rational principles which exist in logic, mathematics, ethics, and metaphysics are so
fundamentally true that denying them causes one to fall into contradiction. Piaget
epitomizes the classic rationalist tradition by arguing the universality of a series of
invariant developmental stages, each with its own set of inherent logical operations
that successively and inexorably lead the child to construct a mental representation
of the real world akin to that of the detached, dispassionate scientist.
Constructivists view reality as constructed and culturally constituted. Originally
introduced by Vygotsky (1978), the constructivist view stipulates that cultural fea-
tures, like language and other symbolic systems, mediate thought and place their
stamp on our representations of reality. The constructivist view deals with the con-
struction and representation of human interaction. The acceptability of the construc-
tions of this culturally constituted reality is governed by acceptable conventions and
meanings within a culture rather than by empirical and logical verication. The
constructivists view claims that the end result of its construction is the world of
culture, which consists of the cultural communal tool kit or traditions for under-
standing behavior and beliefs within a cultural group.
Stephan Hawking and Mlodinow (2010) articulated his view of reality as model-
dependent realism, which he posited as the framework with which to interpret mod-
ern science. According to him,
there is no picture- or theory-independent concept of reality. Instead we will adopt a view
we will call model-dependent realism: the idea that a physical theory or world picture is a
model (generally of mathematical nature) and a set of rules that connect the elements of the
model to observations (p. 58).

Hawkings idea of model-dependent realism does not accept the assumptions of

classical science adopted by what he calls realists (in other words, empiricists). He
gives the example of a particle in quantum physics to refute the assumption of realists
that there exists a real external world whose properties are denite and independent
1.2 Narratives Account of Reality Constitution 5

of their perceiver: a particle has neither a denite position or velocity until it is mea-
sured by an observer, so it does not have an independent existence of the observer.
Hawking posits that model dependent realism applies also to the conscious and
sub-conscious mental models we all create in order to interpret and understand the
everyday world. (p. 62). In that regard, model-dependent realism comes close to
constructivisms concept of reality.

1.2 Narratives Account of Reality Constitution

In his book Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Bruner (1986) introduced two modes of
thought, the narrative and paradigmatic, two distinctive modes of cognitive func-
tioning that cannot be reduced to each other. These two modes of thought are com-
plementary in the sense that many scientic and mathematical hypotheses start as
stories based on personal experience, while many scientic ideas lead to different
forms of art. Both modes of thought, according to Bruner, are different ways of
world making:
the imaginative application of the paradigmatic mode leads to good theory, tight analysis,
logical proof, or empirical discovery guided by reasoned hypothesis. The imaginative
application of the narrative mode leads instead to good stories, gripping drama, believable
(though not necessarily true) historical accounts. It deals in human or human-like inten-
tion and action and the vicissitudes and consequences that mark their course (p. 13).

Though they cannot be reduced to each other and they have different truths and
different procedures of veriability, the narrative and paradigmatic modes of
thought are similar in that they both construct possible worlds of reality. These
worlds are not contradictory but complementary in the efforts of human beings to
give meaning to their experiences.

1.2.1 Paradigmatic Mode of Thought

According to Bruner (1986), the world that the paradigmatic mode of thought
attempts to create is the ideal of a formal, mathematical system of description and
explanation of the experienced world which employs categorization or conceptual-
ization and the operations by which categories are established, instantiated, ideal-
ized, and related one to the other to form a system (p. 12). The domain of the
paradigmatic mode of thinking includes not only the observable worlds but also the
possible worlds (theories) that can be generated and tested against the observable
worlds. The paradigmatic mode of thought has contributed to the development over
the millennia of powerful devices such as logic, mathematics, and sciences. For veri-
cation, the paradigmatic mode of thought appeals to formal and empirical proof.
Since they are not reducible to each other, the narrative and paradigmatic modes
of thought are different ways of constructing possible worlds. These possible worlds
have different truths.
6 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

1.2.2 Narrative Mode of Thought

According to Bruner (1986), the world that the narrative mode of thought attempts
to create is a world made up entirely of the psychic realities of the protagonists,
leaving knowledge of the real world of individuals in the realm of the implicit
(p. 14). Narratives are not simply the recounting of past events but are ways that
shape and are shaped by our consciousness of the world. The narrative mode of
thought establishes not truth but verisimilitude (p. 11).
Bruner (1991) makes no distinction between narrative as a mode of thought and
narrative as discourse:
I shall have a great difculty in distinguishing what may be called the narrative mode of
thought from the forms of narrative discourse. As with all prosthetic devices, each enables
and gives form to the other, just as the structure of language and the structure of thought
eventually become inextricable (p. 5).

The narrative has two landscapes: one is the landscape of action, consisting of
agent, intention, situation, and instrument; and the other is the landscape of con-
sciousness, i.e., what those involved in the action know, think, or feel. There are at
least three forms of narrative: life as narrative, art form as narrative, and human-
making of experience and knowledge as narrative. For Bruner (2004), life as narra-
tive, or autobiography, is telling the story of ones own life, and it involves the same
kind of construction of the human imagination as a narrative; that is, it is a continu-
ous interpretation and reinterpretation of our experience. In the narrative as a form
of art, what gives a story its unity is the manner in which plight, characters, and
consciousness interact to yield a structure that has a start, a development and a sense
of ending (p. 21).
The human-making of experience and knowledge is the most ubiquitous of the
three forms of narrative. Bruner (1991) argued that narrative is the main form of
organizing human experience:
As I have argued extensively elsewhere, we organize our experience and our memory of
human happenings mainly in the form of narrative-stories, excuses, myths, reasons for
doing and not doing, and so on. Narrative is a conventional form, transmitted culturally and
constrained by each individual's level of mastery and by his conglomerate of prosthetic
devices, colleagues, and mentors (p. 5).

Bruner argues vehemently for his main thesis that narrative is not only a form of
representing reality but also operates as an instrument of mind in the construction of
reality. His thesis, in a nutshell, is that reality is narratively constituted.

1.3 Activity-Theoretic Account of Reality Constitution

Vygotskys (1978) idea of cultural mediation of actions ushered the rst generation
of activity theory, in which the conditioned direct connection between stimulus (S)
and response (R) is transcended by a complex mediated act, commonly
1.4 Narrative View of Culture 7

represented as a triangle with subject, object, and mediating artifact as vertices.

The subject is a human agent, the object is the goal represented by an outcome, and
the mediating artifacts include symbolic and semiotic artifacts.
Leontev (1978), the father of activity theory, was a psychologist who was inter-
ested in how human consciousness and personality are shaped by the activities
human individuals are engaged in (Leontev, 1978). Leontev dened activity as:
the unit of life that is mediated by mental reection. The real function of this unit is to
orient the subjects in the world of objects. In other words, activity is not a reaction or aggre-
gate of reactions, but a system with its own structure, its own internal transformations, and
its own development (Leontev, 1981, p. 46).

A central assertion of activity theory is that our knowledge of the world is medi-
ated by our interaction with it, and thus human behavior and thinking occur within
meaningful contexts as people conduct purposeful, goal-directed activities. This
theory strongly advocates socially organized human activity rather than mind or
behavior as the major unit of analysis in psychological studies. Leontev identied
several interrelated levels or abstractions in his theory of activity, with each level
associated with a special type of unit. The most general level is associated with the
unit of activity that deals with specic real activities, such as work, play, and learn-
ing. The second level of analysis focuses on the unit of goal-directed action, that is,
process subordinated to a conscious goal. The third level of analysis is associated
with the unit of operation or the conditions under which the action is carried out.
Operations help actualize the general goal to make it more concrete.
Human activity can be realized in two forms: internal (or mental) activity and
external activity (with a practical objective) (Leontev, 1981). The fundamental,
primary form of human activity is external and practical. This form brings humans
into direct contact with objects, thus redirecting, changing, and enriching the activ-
ity. The internal plane of activity results from internalizing external processes.
Internalization is the transition in which external processes with external, material
objects are transformed into processes that take place at the mental level, the level
of consciousness (Zinchenko & Gordon, 1981, p. 74).
All indications suggest that activity theory formulates that reality is constituted
of human activity. For Leontev, human consciousness is shaped by purposeful
human activity and it is the unit of life that orients human beings in the world of
objects. For Cole and Engestrm, two known proponents of activity theory, human
activity is the instrument of the mind in constructing reality.

1.4 Narrative View of Culture

According to Bruner (1990) culture is constituted of deeply entrenched symbolic

systems into which humans are born. These symbolic systems, of which language
is central, offer the tools necessary to construct meaning. Meaning, via culture, is
rendered public and shared (pp. 1213). Thus, culture provides us with the public
and communal tool kit to construct and interpret meaning in that specic culture.
8 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

For Bruner, culture represents those shared and public meanings constituting the
folk psychology (or common sense) that provides more or less the normative
description that may interpret how people feel, think, or behave in that culture.
Along with Bruners focus on narrative as the tool for constructing reality comes
a connection between narrative and culture, for his notion of culture is also narra-
tive. Upon entering (cultural) life, individuals enter a story that was begun before
them and one which they will be helped in understanding by their elders:
It is as if we walk on stage into a play whose enactment is already in progressa play
whose somewhat open plot determines what parts we may play and toward what denoue-
ments we may be heading. Others on stage already have a sense of what the play is about,
enough of a sense to make negotiations with the newcomer possible. (Bruner, 1990, p. 34).

Bruner further argues that our perceptions of our experiences, and the processes
for remembering them, are ordered in narrative fashion by narrative schemas. These
narrative schemas are informed by larger scale narratives that are part of the folk
psychological conceptions of the world (p. 59). To illustrate the interrelationships
among the triad (person, mind, and culture), I compare two large-scale narratives
from two great books of two great cultures: the Quran of Islam and the Dialogues of
Plato of the Greek culture (Jurdak, 1999).
For Muslims, the Quran does not simply consist of revelations, but it is the very
words of God, embodied in an immutable text in Arabic. The narrative quoted from
the Quran (Fig. 1.1) illustrates the extent to which the Quran establishes a complete
system of civil laws to the point that inheritance laws in effect in Islamic courts
adhere fully to its narrative. It also illustrates the sophisticated use of numbers in
communicating precise quantitative concepts for utilitarian purposes whose ultimate
goal remains to know God through His Book and adhere to His commandments.
And unto you belongeth a half of that which your wives leave, if they have no child; but if
they have a child then unto you the fourth of that which they leave, after any legacy they
may have bequeathed, or debt (they may have contracted), hath been paid. And unto them
belongeth the fourth of that which ye leave if ye have no child, but if ye have a child then
the eighth of that which ye leave, after any legacy ye may have bequeathed, or debt (ye may
have contracted), hath been paid. And if a man or a woman have a distant heir (having left
neither parent nor child), and he (or she) have a brother or a sister (only on the mother's
side) then to each of them twain (the brother and the sister) the sixth, and if they be more
than two, then they shall be sharers in the third, after any legacy that may have been
bequeathed or debt (contracted) not injuring (the heirs by willing away more than a third of
the heritage) hath been paid. A commandment from Allah .Allah is Knower, Indulgent."
(Surrah IV, 12). (Pickthal, 1970).

Socrates (470/469399 BC) was the Greek philosopher credited as one of the
founders of western philosophy. In his dialogue Meno (Jowett, 1937) (Fig. 1.1),
Plato presents his ideas about knowledge, teaching, and learning using an example
from mathematics. The persons in the dialogue are Meno, Socrates, and a slave of
Menos (referred to as Boy). The illiterate Boy learns certain mathematical con-
clusions through the answers elicited by Socratess questions. The dialogue pro-
ceeds as follows: (1) The Boy learns that the area (size) of a square of side two
feet is four (square) feet; (2) To the question about a square of double area (8 square
feet), The Boy conjectures that it should have double the side i.e., four feet; (3)
1.4 Narrative View of Culture 9

Soc. Do you see, Meno, what advances he has Soc. Suppose that we fill up the vacant
made in his power of recollection? He did not corner?
know at first, and he does not know now,
Boy. Very good.
what is the side of a figure of eight feet ; but
then he thought that he knew, and answered Soc. Here, then, there are four equal
confidently as if he knew, and had no spaces?
difficulty; now he has a difficulty, and neither Boy. Yes.
knows nor fancies that he knows.
Soc. And how many times larger is this
Men. True. space than this other?
Soc. Is he not better off in knowing his
Boy. Four times.
ignorance?
Soc. But it ought to have been twice
Men. I think that he is. only, as you will remember.
Soc. If we have made him doubt and given
Boy. True.
him the 'torpedo's shock' have we done him
any harm? Soc. And does not this line, reaching
from corner to corner, bisect each of
Men. I think not.
these spaces?
Soc. We have certainly, as would seem, Boy. Yes.
assisted him in some degree to the discovery
of the truth; and now he will wish to remedy Soc. And are there not here four equal lines
his ignorance, but then he would have been which contain this space?
ready to tell the entire world again and aga in Boy. There are.
that the double space should have a double Soc. Look and see how much this space is.
side.
Boy. I do not understand.
Men. True
Soc. Has not each interior line cut
Soc. But do you suppose that he would ever off half of the four spaces?
have enquired into or learned what he
fancied that he knew, though he was really Boy. Yes.
ignorant of it, until he had fallen into Soc. And how many spaces are there
perplexity under the idea that he did not in this section?
know, and had desired to know?
Boy. Four.
Men. I think not, Socrates.
Soc. And how many in this?
Soc. Then he was the better for the Boy. Two.
torpedo's touch?
Soc. And four is how many times two?
Men. I think so. Boy. Twice.
Soc. Mark now the farther development. I Soc. And this space is of how many
shall only ask him, and not teach him, and feet?
do you watch a nd see if you find me telling Boy. Of eight feet.
or explaining anything to him, instead of Soc. And from what line do you get this figure?
eliciting his opinion. Tell me, boy, is not Boy. From this.
this a square of four feet which I have Soc. That is, from the line which extends from
drawn? corner to corner of the figure of four feet?
Boy. Yes. Boy. Yes.
Soc. And now I add another square equal Soc. And that is the line which the learned call
to the former one? the diagonal. And if this is the proper name,
Boy. Yes. then you, Meno's Slave, are prepared to affirm
Soc. And a third, which is equal to either that the double space is the square
of them? of the diagona l?
Boy. Yes Boy. Certainly, Socrates.

Fig. 1.1 Meno dialogue (Jowett, 1937, pp. 363-365)

10 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

Socrates makes him recollect or discover that such a square actually has a side of
less than 3 and greater than 2. The dialogue then proceeds as in Fig. 1.1.
By comparing and contrasting the two narratives, one would recognize schemes
that still characterize Islamic and Western cultures. In the narrative from the Quran,
knowledge is xed and nal because its truth has the authority and nality of the
Divine, whereas in the Meno dialogue, knowledge resides in the human mind and
lends itself to development. In both narratives, knowledge is linked to power: The
narrative of the Quran comes from Allah, the Knower, whereas, in the Meno dia-
logue, Socrates has the knowledge and the power to give it or withhold it. Learning
(or consciousness) comes as an act of knowledge in the narrative from the Quran;
on the other hand, knowledge is discovered through Socratess instigation in the
form of discovering knowledge that is already there.

1.5 Activity-Theoretic View of Culture

Vygotskys (1978) concept of cultural mediation of actions overcomes the division

between the individual and culture. The individual could no longer be understood
without his or her cultural means; and the society could no longer be understood
without the agency of individuals who use and produce artifacts (Engestrm, 2001,
p. 134). Objects become cultural entities and purposeful action toward objects
became the key to understanding the cultural human psyche.
The second generation was ushered by Leontev (1981), who expanded the con-
cept of individual activity to a collective activity by introducing the element of
division of labor as an essential component of collective activity. It was then left to
Engestrm (1987) to formally introduce and represent collective activity as activity
system. Activity system is a purposeful collective activity in which a subject (or
subjects) is engaged in attaining an object shared by a community using mediating
artifacts, where responsibilities are assigned collectively among members of the
community (division of labor) according to policies within the social cultural con-
text (rules). Figure 1.2 represents a schematic diagram of the activity system.
The role of culture in the activity system appears in all nodes of the system. The
upper triangle is the basic individual activity, already inuenced by the role of cul-
ture. The activity system includes a community, which is the cultural group in which
the collective activity is taking place. The presence of the community calls for a
collectively agreed-upon distribution of the activity on the members of the commu-
nity. The rules include the sociocultural norms (values, beliefs ) of the larger
community in which the activity is taking place.
The third generation of activity theory was articulated by Engestrm (2001)
who introduced the construct of different interacting activity systems, occurring
when one or more different activity systems form a network which works jointly
toward a shared or collaboratively constructed common object. This interconnected
system forms, in turn, a new activity system which can account for the actions of
individuals and groups within the interconnected systems. The development of this
1.5 Activity-Theoretic View of Culture 11

Mediating artifacts

Subject Object

Sense
Rules Community Division of labor Outcome
making

Fig. 1.2 Activity system of a school

interconnected activity system came as a response to the criticism leveled at the

second-generation activity system which was not sensitive to cultural diversity
because it focused on the interaction within one system, and thus required interac-
tion among different activity systems.
Engestrm (2001) articulated ve principles for interacting systems to be consid-
ered as a unied activity system. The rst principle is that the system formed by the
interacting activity systems be a collective, artifact-mediated and object-oriented
activity system, which can be considered a unit of analysis. The second principle is
that the interconnected system allows for multiple voices by enabling participants to
carry their own diverse histories, within the artifacts, rules, and conventions of the
system. The third principle is that of historicity, by which the interconnected activ-
ity system can only be understood against the history of interacting activity systems.
The fourth principle is that the interconnected activity system allows internal con-
tradictions as sources of change and development. The fth principle is that the
interconnected activity system allows expansive transformations, which enable the
system to reconceptualize its object to embrace a qualitative transformation in its
mode of activity.
Culture plays a central role in activity theory at the levels of the individual, the
community of practice, and the society as a whole. From an activity-theoretical
perspective, the consciousness of a human agent is the product of culturally medi-
ated human activity (Engestrm, Engestrm, & Krkkinen, 1995, p. 21). From
this perspective, the community of practice of an activity system has its own cultural
practices which are unique, as maintained by Roth et al. (2004): Different elds are
characterized by the culture associated with them and their spatial and temporal
locations (p. 51). However, these communities of practice are not isolated and can
interact with each other, entailing that cultural practices of one community may be
enacted in a different community of practice, thereby creating contradictions in that
community of practice. According to Roth et al. (2004), this weakness of cultural
boundaries is not inherently a decit; rather, it creates potential for action, such as
engaging in co-generative dialogue (p. 67).
12 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

A case study by Roth et al. (2004) illustrates how the perspective of activity
theory can dene the relations between person, mind, and culture. The purpose of
this study was to exemplify and articulate the continuous making and remaking of
the identities of teachers and students as they participate in the praxis of urban
schooling. Its focus was the role of the activity system as a whole in the process of
producing and reproducing individual participants, and with it the culture of which
each individual, in this case Cristobal and Ya-Meer, is a constituent part. In this
study, Cristobal (science teacher) and Ya-Meer (student) brought to the science
classroom cultural resources that they had produced through their participation in a
variety of elds throughout their lives. Roth et al. (2004) demonstrated that by par-
ticipating in the activity system of schooling, the identities of the student and the
teacher were continuously made and remade. The authors explain that when the
patterns of action contribute to collective activity and align with the object of the
activity system, events unfold relatively smoothly. However, when contradictions
occur due to the enactment of culture from another eld, actions may be interpreted
as resistive, and struggles may occur within the community. The authors conclude
that through co-generative dialogues, the teacher changed from someone unable to
control the class to a respected and successful school staff member, and the student
changed from a street ghter to an A student.

1.6 The World View

World view is a construct which has different meanings in different elds, such as
epistemology, psychology, anthropology, and religion. The Greenwood Dictionary
of Education (Collins & O Brien, 2011) denes world view as:
the lens through which an individual perceives, interprets, and makes sense of the world.
It is moderated by the attitudes, beliefs, values, and learned assumptions that have devel-
oped over time, through an individuals personal experience of culture and cultural identi-
cation (p. 504).

Encyclopedia of Identity (Jackson, 2010) provides the following description of

world view:
To posit a discussion of identity and worldview is to explore philosophical constructs of
time, place, and culture. The components of a denition of oneself (self / being a commonly
accepted synonym for the identity of the human) change depending on the habitat of the
human, the historical era in which he or she lives, and the culture to which his or her com-
munity subscribes. Ones worldview encompasses not only ones particular and individual-
ized perspective on the common, mundane, and ordinary comings and goings of daily life
but also a comprehensive and usually personal conception of the collective self, humanity
in all its pluralities (p. 896).
Worldview is an aggregate set of values, an individual prism for interpreting reality. It is
the outcome of thinking about the way things were, the way things are, or the way things
could or should be (p. 897).
1.7 School as a Moderator of Student Worldview 13

Comparing the two denitions of world view, some commonalities and differ-
ences emerge. First, both denitions view the world view as a lens or perspective
through which reality is perceived. However, the rst denition views attitudes,
beliefs, values, and learned assumptions as moderators of the lens, whereas the
second denition views the aggregate set of values and the individual prism as
components of the world view of a person. Another similarity is that both deni-
tions posit personal experience as an integral part of the world view of a person.
Moreover, the two denitions agree that ones world view encompasses space, time,
and culture. Finally, in both denitions, ones world view is closely linked to ones
identity, and world view varies according to temporal, spatial, or cultural changes as
does ones identity.
How does the world view construct compare with the concept of real world? If
one adopts the classical positivist perspective of the real world as the physical and
natural world that exists independently of the humans world view, then ones
knowledge does not affect the real world. On the other hand, if one assumes that
knowledge (what we know about the natural and social worlds) determines what is
real (reality), then the real world is closely linked to the world view construct. Of
course, the nature of the lens and what we see through that lens have different inter-
pretations. The previous sections introduced the narrative and activity theory inter-
pretations of the perspective we use to view the world and the possible worlds we
see through that perspective.
In summary, it can be asserted that the real world of a student corresponds to a
large extent to the world of space, time, and culture as viewed by the lens of the
students world view. Does this imply that there are many possible real worlds for
students? If yes, then how is education capable of linking learning to the real world,
knowing that there is a multiplicity of possible real worlds in any classroom, any-
where in the world? These questions pose a dilemma which needs to be addressed
and this is where the relation between individual mind and collective mind comes to
our rescue, as argued above.

1.7 School as a Moderator of Student Worldview

The triad of person, mind, and culture in a specic culture impacts student world
views similarly to how it impacts the world views of the other participants in the
same culture. However, students, by virtue of their membership in the school
institution, are likely to moderate their world view by their perception of the
school in relation to the real world outside the school. While the positivist view
of reality assumes that our knowledge does not affect reality and hence
the school does not moderate student world view, the narrative and activity-
theoretical views assume that the personal world view is moderated by our
cognition and culture.
14 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

The interpretations of the narrative and activity-theoretical accounts of how

school moderates the world view of students will be presented and compared here.
For Bruner (1986), the relation between education and culture determines the role
the school plays in moderating the students world. For him:
a culture is as much a form for negotiating meaning and for explicating action as it is a
set of rules or specications for action . It is the forum aspect of culture that gives its
participants a role in constantly making and remaking the culture (p. 123).

For Bruner there are two ways to relate education to culture. On the one hand,
there is the tradition that views the process of education as a transmission of knowl-
edge and values by those who know to those who do not. On the other hand, there
is the view that the process of education should enable the young to negotiate and
recreate meaning. For Bruner, the traditional view of transmission will disconnect
the students from cultural making and remaking, and hence isolate them from mak-
ing and remaking their own world views. On the other hand, the view of negotiating
and recreating meaning gives its participants an active participatory role, rather than
one of performing spectators, in making and remaking their own world views.
From an activity-theoretical perspective, schooling is one of the organized pur-
poseful collective activity systems. As an activity system, the school is a community
(students, teachers and other school staff, parents) in which a student or classes
(subjects) are engaged in symbolic and material tools (mediating artifacts) to learn
(object) according to school policies (rules) and according to specic division of
labor (for more details see Chap. 4).
From an activity-theoretical perspective, different elds are characterized by the
culture associated with them and their spatial and temporal locations; consequently,
each community of practice of an activity system has its own cultural practices, as
maintained by Roth et al. (2004). Another key concept in activity theory is that peo-
ple in an activity make and remake their identities as they actively participate in
activity systems. However, the multiple identities of a person across different activity
systems are integrated because of the weakness of cultural boundaries among differ-
ent communities of practice. Thus, the active participation of students in the activity
system of the school is likely to enable students to remake their identities. As a
result, the school, from an activity-theoretical perspective, impacts the students
world view, since the latter is closely linked to the construct of student identity.

1.8 My Narrative About the Real World

As I started writing this book, I realized how problematic the term real world is,
at least as commonly used. We use the term real in ordinary discourse as an adjec-
tive to indicate a quality which has a variety of meanings: actual, physical, material,
factual, tangible, existent, genuine and there is little problem in inferring the
meaning from the context. However, when we use the term real world, we enter
into a contradictory and messy discussion: Does the material world have the same
meaning as the existent world? And if yes, is it then that our thoughts, which are
1.8 My Narrative About the Real World 15

not material, nonexistent, or fake? Or is it that the term real world has a variety of
meanings which may be inferred from the context in which it is used? I believe that
the difculty stems from the fact that the term real is an adjective, i.e., an attribute
that is assigned to an object, whereas the term real world is a compound noun
which refers to an object which has its own attributes. As I started working on this
book I realized that the attributes of a real world in a scholarly discourse can only
be dened within a specic epistemological/psychological/cultural/ theoretical per-
spective. Consequently, I decided to postpone the writing of the rst chapter until I
had written part 2 of the book, which included the ve chapters (Chaps. 48) dis-
cussing the ve theoretical perspectives I intended to use to analyze real-world
problem solving: activity theory, mathematical modeling, narrative, critical mathe-
matics education, and ethnomathematics.
When I rst submitted the book proposal to my editor, I included the ve theo-
retical perspectives in part 2 of my proposed book because of my conviction, based
on my own experience and my extensive knowledge of the literature, of their rele-
vance to real-world problem solving. However, I knew little then about their differ-
ent conceptions of the real world and how the perspectives they offer will eventually
contribute to and t within the overall structure of the book, which after all deals
with real-world problem solving. The challenge at that time seemed to be insur-
mountable: If those ve theoretical perspectives have different conceptions of the
real world, then how could these different perspectives be integrated into a coher-
ent theory of instructionthe ultimate goal of this book?
Writing the chapters on the ve perspectives of the real world helped me under-
stand their views on reality. As a result of my engagement with the ve theoretical
perspectives, I came to realize that they share some commonalities. With the excep-
tion of modeling, the other four perspectives seem to assume, directly or indirectly,
that the conception of reality they posit is based on hypothesized relations between
the human agent, cognition, and culture. Activity theory assumes that reality is con-
stituted of human activity, which is the unit of life, in which the subject (human
agent) engages in actions to achieve a purpose (object) using mediating artifacts
(cultural products). Bruners narrative posits that reality at the individual level is
narratively constituted; that is, narrative is not only a form of representation of real-
ity but also operates as an instrument of mind in the construction of reality. Critical
mathematics education stipulates that language (and hence mathematics as a lan-
guage) is part of a formatting of reality and thus our cognition of the quantitative
aspects of the world is formatted through mathematics. Ethnomathematics concerns
itself with the way by which cultural groups understand, articulate, and use the con-
cepts and practices which are described as mathematical. Mathematical modeling
stands out as the only one among the ve perspectives which assumes implicitly that
reality is independent of the human mind. The individual can use mathematics to
represent the real world but not to construct it.
My analysis of the ve theoretical perspectives convinced me that, at the practi-
cal level, the existence of differences in the meaning of the real world does not
necessarily constrain human agents from simultaneously using multiple practices,
regardless of the conicting conceptions of the real world. Let me rst try to
16 1 What Is Real About the Real World?

explain the basis of my conviction. I start from the position that when human
agents, individually or collectively, try to achieve a desirable object, they resort to
available cultural artifacts and choose those that are perceived helpful to achieve
the desired object. In other words, theoretical perspectives do not factor in human
activities. In my long career in a variety of cultural settings, I have not observed
teachers who teach according to a certain theory or students who learn in a way
that can be explained by one or more theories.
Now let me turn to some examples to illustrate my conviction that multiple prac-
tices can be used in the same situation, simultaneously or consecutively, regardless
of their conicting conceptions of the real world. In mathematical modeling, which
assumes an objective reality independent of the human mind, a situation which
lends itself to modeling by mapping the real world to the mathematical world using
mathematical discourse may also lend itself to narrative representation, through nar-
rative discourse. Along the same lines, a situation which lends itself to modeling
may also lend itself to ethnomathematics; mapping the real world to the mathemati-
cal world through mathematical discourse may also be viewed as an activity whose
solution may resort to all available cultural practices and artifacts in addition to
mathematics and language. This same situation may also be approached from a
critical mathematics education perspective and can thus be seen as a way of reading
the world (developing critical consciousness of the world in terms of numbers and
gures) as the actions through which one tries to grasp social, political, cultural, and
economic features of ones life-world, and also as a way of writing the world as the
active way of changing this world through mathematics.
In conclusion, even if theoretical perspectives differ in their meaning of the real
world, the fact is that humans deal mainly with its representation in terms of lan-
guage, mathematics, or cultural practices. Human agents are not constrained by
theoretical interpretations of the world and they can move easily between and
among these interpretations and choose to act according to their purposes and
resources. This probably resonates with Bruners vision of Actual Minds, Possible
Worlds (1986).

References

Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18(1), 121.
Bruner, J. (2004). Life as narrative. Social Research, 71(3), 691710.
Brunner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Collins, J. W., & O Brien, N. P. (Eds.). (2011). The Greenwood dictionary of education (2nd ed.).
Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood.
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrm, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualiza-
tion. Journal of Education & Work, 14(1), 133156.
References 17

Engestrm, Y., Engestrm, R., & Krkkinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing
in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and
Instruction, 5(4), 319336.
Hawking, S., & Mlodinow, L. (2010). The grand design. London: Bantam Books.
Jackson, R. L. (Ed.). (2010). Encyclopedia of identity. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Jowett, M. A. (1937). The dialogues of Plato. New York, NY: Random House. Translator into
English.
Jurdak, M. (1999). The role of values in mathematics education. Humanistic Mathematics Network
Journal, 21, 3945.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept
of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Lucariello, J. (1995). Mind, culture, person: Elements in a cultural psychology. Human
Development, 38(1), 218.
Pickthal, M. (1970). The meaning of the Glorious Coran. Beirut: Dar Al-Kitab Allubnani.
Translator into English.
Roth, W., Tobin, K., Elmesky, R., Carambo, C., Mcknight, Y., & Beers, J. (2004). Re/Making
identities in the praxis of urban schooling: A cultural historical perspective. Mind, Culture &
Activity, 11(1), 4869.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Zinchenko, V. P., & Gordon, V. M. (1981). Methodological problems in analyzing activity. In J. V.
Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: M. E.
Sharpe.
Chapter 2
School, Society, and Culture

PA [Pedagogic Action] is, objectively, symbolic violence first

insofar as the power relations between the groups or classes
making up a social formation are the basis of the arbitrary
power which is the precondition for the establishment of a
relation of pedagogic communication
(Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990, p. 6)

School, society, and culture, paired to each other or viewed jointly, have occupied a
central role in educational sociology discourse and research in the last century. The
theoretical perspectives on the relations between and among schools ranged from a
position advocating the deschooling of society to a position which considered for-
mal schooling as a necessity for social cohesion and acculturation. This chapter
covers an overview of the theoretical underpinnings and implications of the major
theoretical issues on the complex relations of school, society, and culture, ones that
appeared in scholarly discourse in the last century. The chapter compares the differ-
ent theoretical perspectives on formal schooling, their implications for the value of
formal schooling in the real world, and their implications for the modes by which
students are acculturated.

2.1 Perspectives on Formal Schooling

In the last century, many perspectives on the nature and value of formal schooling
in relation to the student, school, and culture have been proposed and debated. This
section presents and compares the theoretical underpinnings of the major perspec-
tives on formal schooling, focusing on the following perspectives: critical repro-
duction (Marx), emancipatory (Freire), social mobility (Weber), socialization
(Durkheim), deschooling (Illich), personalized learning, and cultural reproduction
(Bourdieu).

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 19

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_2
20 2 School, Society, and Culture

2.1.1 Formal Schooling from the Critical Perspective

The critical reproduction perspective views formal schooling as a means of legiti-

matizing and hence perpetuating pre-existing class privilege. This perspective
argues that ruling classes created and maintained a schooling system that systemati-
cally favors students with privileged backgrounds by giving them class-neutral edu-
cational certications, and prevents working and lower class children from achieving
these certications in comparable measure (Bowles & Gintis, 1976). Its name of
critical reproduction came from the fact that it critiqued all the school systems
because they tended to reproduce the existing power structure in which the class that
has the means of material production at its disposal has concurrent control over the
means of knowledge production and transmission.
Based on the Marxist idea that the production and transmission of knowledge
serve the interests of those in power, the ruling class (originally the bourgeois) is the
one that controls the means of material production and consequently its ideas
become the ruling ideas. The school as the social institution charged with the role of
transmitting knowledge by necessity serves the ideas of the ruling class, and hence
it reproduces and maintains a school system that is designed to serve the dominance
of the ruling class at the expense of those ruled. Thus, the school, from this perspec-
tive, cannot promote social equalities.

2.1.2 Formal Schooling from an Emancipatory Perspective

Freires emancipatory education (Freire, 1970/2013) adopts a Marxist critical stance

but differs from critical reproduction theory in its strong belief that the school is
capable of overcoming oppression through the human agency of both students and
teachers. Students have the capability of being active in remaking themselves and
their society through the construct of praxis, which involves the two simultaneous
processes of reection and action. Freire believes that emancipatory education
should not be neutral. According to him, for education to serve the struggles for
humanity and liberation from oppression, it should always be linked to broader
social movements. To achieve the goal of emancipating students through develop-
ing their abilities to read and write their world, Freire advocates the adoption of
problem-posing pedagogies as an alternative to what he calls banking education
(2013). Banking education can be illustrated by a banking analogy, as an act of
depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the deposi-
tor, and similarly to a bank account, the scope of action of the student is limited to
receiving, ling, and storing the deposits. The banking concept of education negates
education and knowledge as processes of inquiry and considers knowledge as a gift
bestowed by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom they
consider ignorant; it is in this way that banking education projects the ideology of
oppression. In contrast, problem-posing pedagogies, by abandoning the dichotomy
2.1 Perspectives on Formal Schooling 21

between teacher and student, render the educator as constantly re-forming

reections, and the students become critical co-investigators in dialogue with the
teacher rather than docile receivers of information.

2.1.3 Formal Schooling from the Social Mobility Perspective

The social mobility perspective views formal education as an effective mechanism

of social mobility because of its ability to move people from all social classes up
and down social hierarchies. Stevens (2008) observes that:
empirical ndings have been remarkably consistent: formal schooling does indeed have
independent effects on individual life chances; at the same time, parents tend to use formal
education as a primary means of handing privilege down to their children. (p. 100).

Thus, the reproduction thesis that privilege is passed down from parents to chil-
dren goes hand in hand with the social mobility perspective that formal schooling
has an independent effect on the individuals chances in life.
The social mobility perspective owes its origin to Max Webers theory of the
development of modern societies from the viewpoint of rationalization. Weber
maintains that the historical development of rationalized society in the Occident
resulted from modern capitalistic development and the political and legal institu-
tions that grew simultaneously (Samier, 2002). According to Weber (2002), modern
capitalism involved the rational organization of free labor, the systematic pursuit of
prot, and a modern economic ethos or spirit embodied in the Protestant
ethic. Weber (2002) believes that rationalization implies a systematizing of ones
actions (usually to accord with religious values) to express an increased rigor and
method and a taming of the status naturae (spontaneous aspects of human nature
that are not tamed, channeled, sublimated, or organized). Among the distinctive fac-
tors Weber identies as relevant to this historical development are an emphasis on
a rational, systematic, and specialized pursuit of science and its technical utiliza-
tion by economic interests, accompanied by rationalized law and administration
(Samier, 2002).
According to Stevens (2008), Webers rationalization theory stipulates that:
as societies modernize, inequalities of family, caste, and tribe gradually give way to
hierarchies predicated on individual achievement. In modern times, individuals accumulate
status as they move through the elaborate bureaucracies that characterize industrial societ-
ies: large corporations, centralized governments, big religious organizations, and schools.
(p. 99)

Max Webers conception of the world differs from the Marxist conception in that
it stipulates that economic relations do not solely dene social hierarchy, but also
that political and status systems have independent effects on the character of
inequality. Weber held that formal education is an important mechanism of status
aggrandizement, economic organization, and political legitimation in complex soci-
eties (Stevens, 2008, p. 99). On the other hand, Webers economic rationalization
22 2 School, Society, and Culture

of education as an economic enterprise implies that education should be subjected

to rational economic values and treated as capital, and it is susceptible to exchange
theory and calculation by costbenet analysis.

2.1.4 Formal Schooling from the Socialization Perspective

Socialization refers to a group learning process in order to allow the members to

develop into competent group members. From a socialization perspective, one of
the main functions of formal schooling is to build social cohesion by educating
young people in abstract knowledge that knits groups together in order to foster
reverence for formal authority and to generate emotional allegiance to the nation
(Durkheim, 1977).
The socialization perspective was elaborated by Durkheim. For him, industrializa-
tion and urbanization weakened traditional forms of group cohesionthe family, the
village, and the churchand if modern societies are to maintain their cohesion by
strengthening the allegiance of their members, they need to devise new instruments
for producing solidarity. This for Durkheim is the job of formal secular schooling.
Durkheims conception of schooling as a universalizing glue holding modern
societies together often appeared reactionary. In the last part of the previous century,
and in a period of intense social tensions, socialization was seen by many as a hid-
den curriculum which had the doubtful aim of entitling the privileged students
while dampening the aspirations of socioeconomically disadvantaged students.

2.1.5 Formal Schooling from the Deschooling Perspective

Illichs book entitled Deschooling Society (1971), written at the peak of the expan-
sion of modern educational institutions, provides more of a radical critique of
schools than a perspective informed by a theoretical foundation. Still, I am includ-
ing deschooling under perspectives for two reasons: rst, because this deschooling
viewpoint has inspired variants within the deschooling discourses that are still rel-
evant in our days, and, second, because deschooling focuses, more than any other
perspective, almost exclusively on the relationship between school and society.
In his controversial book referred to above, Illich calls for the disestablishment
of schools through a law forbidding discrimination in hiring, voting, or admission
to centers of learning based on previous attendance at some curriculum (p. 11). He
maintains that:
Equal educational opportunity is, indeed, both a desirable and a feasible goal, but to equate
this with obligator; schooling is to confuse salvation with the Church. School has become
the world religion of a modernized proletariat, and makes futile promises of salvation to the
poor of the technological age. The nation-state has adopted it, drafting all citizens into a
graded curriculum leading to sequential diplomas not unlike the initiation rituals and
2.1 Perspectives on Formal Schooling 23

hieratic promotions of former times. The modern state has assumed the duty of enforcing
the judgment of its educators through well-meant truant ofcers and job requirements,
much as did the Spanish kings who enforced the judgments of their theologians through the
conquistadors and the Inquisition (pp. 1011).

Illich (1971) challenges the assumption made by the school system that most
learning resulted from teaching, and he argues that most people acquire most of
their knowledge outside school. The existence of obligatory schools divided social
reality into two realms: education became unworldly and the world became non-
educational (p. 24).
As an alternative to formal mandatory schooling, Illich suggests four learning
webs (networks) which enable students to gain access to any educational resource
which may help them to dene and achieve their own goals:
1. Reference Services to Educational Objectswhich facilitate access to things or
processes used for formal learning.
2. Skill Exchanges which permit persons to list their skills, as models for others
who want to learn these skills, and the addresses at which they can be found.
3. Peer Matchinga communications network which permits persons to describe
the learning activity in which they wish to engage, in the hope of nding a part-
ner for the inquiry.
4. Reference Services to Educators-at-Largewho can be listed in a directory giv-
ing the self-descriptions of professionals, paraprofessionals, and freelancers,
along with conditions of access to their services.
Two observations are in order here. First, these learning webs, which seemed
far-fetched possibilities in 1971, have become actualities through the information
communication technology as embodied by the Internet. Second, the availability of
these sophisticated learning webs has affected the existence of formal schooling
very little.

2.1.6 Formal Schooling from the Personalized Perspective

Personalized learning is a contested term which holds different meanings for differ-
ent people. Two different personalized discourses have appeared in the UK towards
the end of the twentieth century and in the USA in the last decade. In the UK, the
discourse on personalized learning was a part of a policy debate on the personaliza-
tion of public services. The term personalized learning was introduced in a paper by
Leadbeater (2004) from a think tank, Demos, promoting the idea that individuals be
allowed to interpret the goals and value of their education. Pykett (2009) identies
two interpretations of personalization of learning:
For some proponents of personalization, the idea denotes a modern notion of educational
choice, exibility, parental control and independence from the state. For other, progres-
sive educators, commonly regarded to be from a more left political tradition, it denotes an
education which values personal differences, learner control and democratic schools, and is
opposed to rigid national testing (p. 378379).
24 2 School, Society, and Culture

Pykett maintains that one root of the personalization of learning in the UK can be
traced to the revival of the ideas of the early proponents of deschooling, particularly
John Holt, by a think tank of UK scholars known as Personalized Education Now
(PEN). A book by the founder of the group, Roland Meighan (1995), entitled John
Holt: Personalised Education and the Reconstruction of Schooling, denes the
main principles of the movement. Analyzing the literature produced by this move-
ment, Pykett (2009) concludes that the alternative to mass state schooling offered by
such authors is characterized by ve main tenets:
First, more meaningful autonomy and choice between different types of schools,
and learner-managed choice in terms of what, how, where, and when children
should learn.
Second, home-schooling, and the increased involvement of parents and families
in making decisions about how their children learn.
Third, support of work-based and skill-focused learning.
Fourth, education whose purpose should be to produce exible people.
Thus, schools, for them, are part of the technocratic, authoritarian, bureaucratic
state which denies children and families the right to exibility, choice, home-
schooling, authentic, self-directed learning and freedom.
Pykett (2009) identies a conceptual alliance between deschoolers and conserva-
tives, congregating around the ideas of:
the autonomy of natural, personalized learners, an emancipatory role for education, the
freedom of schools from state bureaucracy, and opportunities for parental control and fam-
ily involvement to promote authentic learning outside the school (p. 384).

A second type of personalized learning which provides individualized learning

through e-learning systems has become a major trend in the last decade, particularly
in the USA. This type of personalized learning is based on the idea of individualiz-
ing learning and making it more adaptive by providing individual students with
adaptive learning environments that are tailored to individual characteristics and
needs. However, the early proponents of personalized learning in the UK made a
conceptual distinction between individualizing and personalizing learning.
Leadbeater (2004) views individualization as a shallow level of personalization:
First, individualization provides a user-friendly service and the freedom of navigat-
ing through the service, whereas personalization goes beyond individualization to
enable the learner to become a co-designer and co-producer of learning. Second,
individualization regards the learner as an individual, while personalization views
the learner as self-organizer of ones own learning as he/she operates within a col-
lective activity of others. Personalized learning allows individual interpretations of
the goals and value of education, whereas individualized learning allows individual
paths for predetermined goals and values of education.
2.1 Perspectives on Formal Schooling 25

2.1.7 Formal Schooling from the Cultural

Reproduction Perspective

In his book Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture (Bourdieu & Passeron,
1990), Bourdieu sets the basis of his theory on the role of education in culture and
hence in society. One of his main theses is that the reproduction of culture through
pedagogic action (education in the broadest sense, including parental and institu-
tional education) plays a major role in the reproduction of the whole social system.
In an educational system, such as formal schooling, the process of cultural repro-
duction takes place through the exchange value of cultural capital students bring to
the educational process for institutionalized cultural capital that can be ultimately
exchanged for economic capital and hence power. Bourdieu (2011) identies three
forms of capital (economic, social, and cultural) which can be exchanged and con-
verted to each other. He also identies three states of cultural capital (embodied,
objectied, and institutionalized) and denes the institutionalized cultural capital
as academic qualications, a certicate of cultural competence which confers
on its holder a conventional, constant, legally guaranteed value with respect to
culture (p. 86).
How does an educational system reproduce the power structure in the society?
Bourdieu maintains that the educational eld is a system of structured relations in
which power is determined by the relative cultural capital accorded to positions or
individuals who occupy these positions in the eld. Students of the dominant class
come to the education process with a greater cultural capital because their families
possess greater social and/or economic capital. In the school system, such cultural
capital can be exchanged for institutional cultural capital, which can later be
exchanged for economic or social capital. Thus, the power relationships in the soci-
ety are reproduced through the school system, which exchanges the superior capital
of the dominant group for a superior institutionalized cultural capital that can be
later translated to other forms of capital. A particular kind of cultural capital that
plays a critical role in formal schooling is the linguistic capital. According to
Bourdieus analysis, students of the dominant groups, because of their cultural
experiences, possess much more linguistic capital than those of the dominated.
Consequently, the linguistic capital possessed by students of dominant groups posi-
tion them at an advantage in obtaining educational capital such as admission to
university.
In Bourdieu and Passeron (1990), Bourdieu equates education with inculca-
tion and views pedagogical action as an arbitrary power which imposes meanings.
The following three foundational premises appear in the rst few pages of the book:
every power which manages to impose meanings and to impose them as legitimate by
concealing the power relations which are the basis of its force, adds its own specically
symbolic force to those power relations (p. 4).
All pedagogic actions (PA) are, objectively, symbolic violence in so far as it is the impo-
sition of a cultural arbitrary by an arbitrary power (p. 5).
PA is, objectively, symbolic violence rst insofar as the power relations between the
groups or classes making up a social formation are the basis of the arbitrary power which is
26 2 School, Society, and Culture

the precondition for the establishment of a relation of pedagogic communication, i.e. for the
imposition and inculcation of a cultural arbitrary by an arbitrary mode of imposition and
inculcation (education) (p. 6).

The rst two premises imply that all pedagogic actions (teaching) undertaken by
educational institutions, such as schools, inict symbolic violence on the domi-
nated, to the extent that they exclude them from access to educational capital by
imposing (inculcating) cultural arbitrary meanings as legitimate while concealing
the power relations which are the basis of their force. The third premise implies that
imposition and inculcation of a cultural arbitrary by an arbitrary mode of imposition
and inculcation (education) is a reection of the power relations between the groups
or classes making up a social formation (society).

2.2 Use Value of Schooling

Use value refers to the value of school educational capital to the individual and
the society at large in terms of its degree of usefulness in meeting individual and
social needs. Niss (1981) identies examples of individual and societal needs.
Examples of individual needs include comprehending the physical and social
worlds, participating actively and critically in the cultural process, and developing
personally at the intellectual, emotional, and experiential levels. Societal needs
include social and economic development, political and administrative government
of society, cultural activity, and values and ideology.
The different perspectives on formal schooling that were introduced in Sect. 2.1
of this chapter either claim or imply different conceptions of the nature and extent
of the use value of formal schooling. I shall discuss their perspectives on the use
value of formal schooling under two categories: the reproduction model and the
developmental model.
The reproduction model includes the perspectives of economic reproduction of
education (Marx), cultural reproduction of education (Bourdieu), and deschooling
(Illich). All three perspectives assign low use value to formal schooling for the soci-
ety as a whole since they postulate that formal schooling reproduces the economic
or cultural stratication that exists in the society and thus has little value in advanc-
ing economic and social development. At the individual level, beyond technical
knowledge, formal education offers little benet from formal schooling because the
latter offers little opportunity for increasing the economic, social, or cultural capital
of students coming from the economically or culturally dominated groups in the
society. To support this view, Williams (2012) writes:
Having searched through many Bourdieu texts, I have yet to nd more than a few almost
trivial references to the use of education or knowledge for society and production per se,
though there are occasional references to the no doubt technical value of education to
competence and the efciency of production (pp. 6768).

Deschooling pushed the reproduction argument to its logical conclusion in the

extreme: If formal schooling has little use value for the individual and society, then
2.3 Pedagogic Modes of Acculturation 27

why not call for the de-establishment of formal schooling. It must be noted however
that the argument of deschoolers was based not only on the reproduction argument
but also on the natural right of the individual to choose on how, when, and what to
learn.
The developmental model includes the perspectives of social mobility (Weber),
socialization (Durkheim), personalized learning (Leadbeater), and emancipatory
education (Freire). These perspectives share the belief that formal schooling has, to
varying degrees, some use value in developing individuals and/or society. The social
mobility perspective stipulates that individuals accumulate status as they move
through elaborate bureaucracies such as school, and this acquired status has eco-
nomic and social value to the individual; it also has value for the society as a whole
since it eventually contributes to the human resources needed for social and eco-
nomic development. The socialization perspective implies a high use value of for-
mal schooling to the society as a whole since its main aim is the development of
social cohesion, a necessary prerequisite for the existence and development of a
society. The personalized learning perspective assigns a high use value to the indi-
vidual rather than the society since, at its deepest level, it calls for providing stu-
dents with the choice of their own learning in terms of what, how, where, and when
they should learn. The emancipatory perspective allocates high use value to formal
schooling for both the individual and society since it stipulates that students should
be active in remaking themselves and their society through praxis, which involves
the two simultaneous processes of reection and action.

2.3 Pedagogic Modes of Acculturation

Various school perspectives differ, not only in terms of the functional relationship
between formal schooling and culture, but also in the process by which students are
acculturated, i.e., acquire and appropriate their own culture. A review of the litera-
ture reveals three main modes of acculturation: transmission, participation, and
inculcation. Transmission refers to a process of acculturation by which those who
know more transmit knowledge and values to those who know less. According to
Brunner (1986), this mode of acculturation rests on the presupposition that the
learners were not only underequipped with knowledge about the world, which
needed to be imparted to them, but were also lacking in values (p. 124). The
pedagogy of transmission views teaching mainly as decit-lling. The participation
mode of acculturation, however, emphasizes the negotiation and sharing of meaning
within signicant social interaction. Brunner (1986) emphasizes the importance of
negotiating and sharing in school education because it is a joint culture creating
as an object of schooling and as an appropriate step en route to becoming a member
of the adult society in which one lives out ones life (p. 127). This participation
mode of acculturation rests on the assumption that learners are capable of construct-
ing and negotiating their meanings. In contrast, the inculcation mode of accultura-
tion refers to a pedagogy which includes a certain degree of imposing knowledge
28 2 School, Society, and Culture

and values on students. The inculcation mode of acculturation does not assume that
imposition is a favorable way of imparting knowledge and values, but rather it inter-
prets the imposition of ideas and values as a result of existing power relations in the
society.
The social mobility and socialization perspectives of formal schooling seem to
lean towards the transmission pedagogic mode. From Webers perspective, educa-
tion should be subjected to rational economic values, treated as capital, and be sus-
ceptible to exchange theory and calculation by costbenet analysis. According to
Stevens (2008) schooling, from Webers perspective, actually entailed-namely, the
formalization and transmission of such fundamentally cultural phenomena as lan-
guage, mathematics, art, and literature-became a static quantity akin to money
(p. 102). The socialization perspective seems to adopt the pedagogic mode of trans-
mission since the ultimate goal of formal schooling from this perspective is to trans-
mit the knowledge and values that promote social solidarity and cohesion.
The emancipatory and the personalized learning perspectives of formal school-
ing tend to promote the participation pedagogic mode of acculturation. Freire, the
leading proponent of emancipatory education, advocated problem-posing peda-
gogy, an essentially participatory pedagogy as an alternative to the banking peda-
gogy, which is essentially the transmission mode of acculturation (Freire,
1970/2013). Similarly, the personalized learning perspective of formal schooling is
based on the idea that individual interpretations of the goals and value of education
should be allowed and that learners are the self-organizers of their own learning as
they operate within the collective activity of others.
The perspectives of economic reproduction of education (Marx), the cultural
reproduction of education (Bourdieu), and deschooling (Illich) share the viewpoint
that the current school systems tend to use inculcation as the pedagogic mode
because, by their nature, schools try to impose the ideas of the dominant class. From
a Marxist point of view, the school as the social institution charged with the role of
imparting knowledge cannot escape imposing (inculcating) the ideas of the domi-
nant class. Bourdieu uses inculcation as equivalent to education and goes further to
say that current schools use arbitrary modes of imposition and inculcation (educa-
tion to impose the ideas of the dominant classes). Thus, one motivation for the call
of deschooling society was that these schools have a hidden curriculum which
serves the interests of the dominant class and is imposed on students from domi-
nated classes.

2.4 My Narrative About School, Culture, and Society

My narrative about school includes my own reections rst on my experiences in

the school I attended as a student and second on the many schools I came to know
in Arab countries in the course of my work as an educator and consultant. I did all
my pre-university education school at my hometown in South Lebanon. The town
residents may be described according to the standards of the 1950s as mainly
2.4 My Narrative About School, Culture, and Society 29

middle class, including merchants, landowners, and professionals, with a minority

of a working class of soldiers, artisans, and workers. My father was an artisan/
small-time contractor, and as such my family was a working class family. My
mother had a high school diploma from an American missionary school and a work-
ing knowledge of English, and was considered to be an educated individual accord-
ing to the standards of the time. My family, especially my mother, had high
educational expectations for the children, particularly for me, the only male child in
the family. My town was known to be the educational hub of the district. Its many
schools were all tuition based and afliated with Christian missionary organiza-
tions, and they attracted many students of diverse socioeconomic and religious
backgrounds from neighboring villages and towns. In the late 1940s, my school was
established by a group of Lebanese notables living in the West, and as such was the
rst non-sectarian, nonprot school, with no religious afliation whatsoever.
As I became more conscious of my socioeconomic status, I started to develop a
sense of empowerment. I can trace that sense to a resilient motivation to excel, as
the only way up the socioeconomic ladder for me and for my family. In hindsight, I
realize that the two factors that may have counterbalanced any inequities that may
have arisen because of my socioeconomic status were the personal capital I brought
to school (my distinguished ability for academic achievement) and my home capital
(attitudes and values). I am inclined now to interpret these factors in terms of
Bourdieus concept of cultural capital (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990) that I brought
to school from my own home environment, particularly my mothers education, her
pedagogic practices, and her high expectations for me.
Which of the school perspectives described earlier would characterize my
school? I believe that the dominant perspective of my school was that of social
mobility. The school was perceived as a gateway to an education in one of the uni-
versities in Beirut. Both parents and students saw the schools curriculum, particu-
larly its emphasis on the English language, its coeducation policy, and its reputation
for emphasizing moral secular values as opportunities to move upward academi-
cally and hence economically and socially. To some extent, the school embodied the
socialization perspective since it projected itself as a national institution as con-
trasted with a religious institution. This nationalism reected itself in the name of
the school, which included the word national, and its program, which encouraged
national cohesion as well as creativity and critical thinking. It is rather difcult,
from my own perspective today, to interpret the schools pedagogy in terms of
Bourdieus cultural reproduction theory. Personally, I would be hesitant to describe
the approach and content of my schools pedagogy as being that of the socially
dominant group in the town. For example, I would not interpret my own motivation
to achieve as a reaction to symbolic violence inicted by the pedagogy of the domi-
nant group (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990), but rather to a number of interacting fac-
tors which included cultural capital from home environment, personal characteristics,
school and teacher attributes, and possibly a reaction to perceived symbolic
violence.
During my career and in the course of my involvement in curriculum development
projects in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Lebanon, I came to be exposed to different
30 2 School, Society, and Culture

schools with different missions. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the emphasis of
the state-funded and state-managed schools is mostly on cultural reproduction
within Islam and, to a lesser degree, on socialization and on social mobility. The
cultural reproduction of the Saudi schools reects itself in the commitment to and
inculcation of the values and practices of Islam. The Arabic language is viewed as
part of Islamic studies since it is the language in which the holy Quran was revealed.
The Saudi curriculum is not limited to Islamic studies but includes all other school
subjects, particularly mathematics and sciences, which are valued for their per-
ceived cultural neutrality and for their academic and technical skills. The socializa-
tion function of the Saudi schools reects itself in promoting loyalty to the state and
monarchy and in providing state-of-the-art educational facilities for all schools. The
social mobility function of the Saudi schools reects itself in the growing need for
human resources in the expanding state bureaucracies and industrialization projects
of the country.
In Sudan, the emphasis of the state-funded and state-managed schools is mostly
focused on social mobility and socialization within local cultural traditions. The
social mobility function reects itself in the growing needs of the socioeconomic
development of the country, particularly its vast agrarian resources. Because Sudan
is a multiethnic, multi-religious country, cultural reproduction on ethnic and reli-
gious grounds was not perceived, at that time, as necessary or viable. On the other
hand, socialization reects itself in the dedication to local cultural traditions to pro-
mote cohesion and solidarity at the local level. One experiment in socialization was
undertaken in the 1930s in Sudan by Grifths, one of her HMI inspectors of educa-
tion who decided to establish an institution of education, with minimal facilities, to
prepare teachers for rural areas, calling it Bakht-Al-Rida. (I visited this institution
many times in the course of the project.) The recruited student teachers were
required to live on campus and lead a combined life of work and education in a
minimalist environment. This experiment that was initially intended to socialize
rural education in Sudan ended up as an institution to prepare educational leader-
ship for the country and as model of teacher education in Eastern Africa.
The school situation in Lebanon is far more complex, diverse, and unusual. The
historical accumulation of events, the last of which was the independence of the
country from the French mandate in 1943, resulted in a complex system of formal
schooling: the state-funded and state-controlled public schools, which constitute
currently about 40 % of the system, and tuition-based private schools which consti-
tute 60 % of the system. The private sector, in turn, includes a variety of schools:
religiously afliated schools and privately owned and managed schools.
The emphasis in both public and private schools in Lebanon is on social mobility
and socialization. The social mobility function of all schools in Lebanon is evident.
Social mobility through education has been a major motivation for parents and stu-
dents because education is conceived as a gateway to opportunities in the service
sector, which is the backbone of the country, particularly since Lebanon has few of
the natural resources needed for industrialization.
On the other hand, the socialization function in Lebanon seems to serve conict-
ing purposes. The public schools and the secular private schools strive to serve
References 31

socialization for the purposes of national and social cohesion; however, the religious
schools tend to promote, implicitly or explicitly, different and sometimes conict-
ing socialization purposes. These schools claim to promote national unity but serve
socialization for their own religious values. The commitment to religious values in
schools varies from an explicit inculcation of a specic religion to an implicit com-
mitment to a certain religious ethos. The diversity of the socialization purposes in
Lebanese schools has been a major obstacle in the way of the educational systems
ability to contribute meaningfully and signicantly to the much-needed national and
social cohesion.

References

Bourdieu, P. (2011). The forms of capital (1986). In I. Szeman & T. Kaposky (Eds.), Cultural
theory: An anthology (pp. 8191). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.).
London: Sage Publications.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the
contradictions of economic life. New York: Basic Books.
Brunner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Durkheim, E. (1977). Evolution of educational thought: Lectures on the formation and develop-
ment of secondary education in France. Translated by Peter Collins. London: Routledge &
Kegan Paul.
Freire, P. (1970/2013). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury.
Illich, I. (1971). Deschooling society. New York: Harper & Row.
Leadbeater, C. (2004). Personalisation through participation. London: Demos.
Niss, M. (1981). Goals as a reection of the needs of society. In R. Morris (Ed.), Studies in math-
ematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 121). Paris: UNESCO.
Meighan, R. (1995). John Holt: Personalised Education and the Reconstruction of Education.
Drake International Services.
Pykett, J. (2009). Personalization and de-schooling: Uncommon trajectories in contemporary edu-
cation policy. Critical Social Policy, 29(3), 374397.
Samier, E. (2002). Weber on education and its administration prospects for leadership in a rational-
ized world. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 30(1), 2745.
Stevens, M. L. (2008). Culture and education. The Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science, 619(1), 97113.
Weber, M. (2002). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA:
Roxbury Publishing Company.
Williams, J. (2012). Use and exchange value in mathematics education: contemporary CHAT
meets Bourdieus sociology. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 5772.
Chapter 3
Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

the symbol system of mathematics is one that has highly

decontextualised meanings (at least when negative number,
fractions and algebra are involved). So the construction of
meaning is particularly difficult in mathematics when
contrasted with reading and writing literacy.
(Jablonka, 2003, p. 82)

Literacy assumes, among other things, the existence of an invented symbolic sys-
tem, such as language or mathematics, to represent objects outside the symbolic
system in the surrounding culture. In addition, literacy involves human interaction
with the symbolic system for the purpose of communicating and interpreting the
world represented by this system. The different conceptions associated with the
symbolic system, the surrounding culture, and the relationships between them result
in different conceptions of literacy. On the other hand, the different ways of impart-
ing literacy to human agents, children or adults, lead to different approaches to lit-
eracy education. This chapter presents and discusses three literacy-related themes.
First, the major perspectives of literacy in general and their associated approaches
to literacy education will be explained. Next, the existence and meaning of mathe-
matical literacy will be compared and contrasted with language literacy. Finally, the
different perspectives of mathematical literacy and their associated approaches to
mathematical literacy education will be identied, explored, and exemplied.

3.1 Perspectives on Literacy

Literacy, a contested concept, has been the subject of debate among educators,
anthropologists, sociologists, and linguists. The majority of language educators use
the term literacy to refer to the reading and writing of a text. Scholars in some social
science elds use literacy to refer to social and cultural practices, while others use
critical literacy to refer to the use of communication media as a means of individual
and social transformation. This section presents the theoretical underpinnings of the
perspectives on literacy and their associated pedagogies.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 33

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_3
34 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

3.1.1 Autonomous Model of Literacy

According to Street (1993), the exponents of an autonomous model of literacy

conceptualize literacy in technical terms, treating it as independent of social con-
text, an autonomous variable whose consequences for society and cognition can be
derived from its intrinsic character (p. 5). On the one hand, the term autonomous
refers to the idea that any communication, particularly a written one, represents an
unambiguous self-contained meaning, independent of who is making communica-
tion. On the other, the term autonomous refers to the assumption that literacy in
itselfautonomouslywill have effects on other social and cognitive practices.
It being autonomous assumes that introducing literacy to the illiterate will enhance
their cognitive skills, improve their economic prospects, and make them better citi-
zens, regardless of the social and economic conditions that accounted for their illit-
eracy in the rst place. The autonomous model of literacy is the most prevalent as
far as schooling and development programs are concerned. In operational terms,
autonomous literacy refers to the technical skills of reading and writing of a text.
The pedagogy associated with the autonomous model of literacy includes a wide
variety of approaches which still share basic features, for, regardless of the lan-
guage, there are technical skills for reading and writing, of a linguistic nature, such
as coding and decoding linguistic behaviors. These technical skills are more or less
universal, although they vary in terms of how they engage the learner and what type
of relationship exists between the learner and the task. Moreover, these skills assume
that the learner is able to arrive at the meaning of the text independently of its cul-
tural context and of the social relationships among the different voices in it. In other
words, the autonomous literacy model views the text as a vehicle to develop the
learners linguistic competence rather than one to enhance the learners understand-
ing of the cultural and social conditions which constituted the text.

3.1.2 Ideological Model of Literacy

The New Literacy Studies (NLS) represent a new tradition of viewing literacy,
focusing not so much on the acquisition of skills but rather on literacy as a social
practice (Street, 1993). Street terms this new perspective of literacy the ideological
model of literacy. From the perspective of NLS, the autonomous model of literacy
disguises the cultural and ideological assumptions that underpin it so that it can then
be presented as though they are neutral and universal (Street, 1993, p. 77). The ideo-
logical model denes literacy instead as a social practice, not simply a technical and
neutral skill, and one that is always embedded in socially constructed epistemological
principles. Research in NLS suggests that, in practice, literacy varies from one social
context to another and from one culture to another and thus NLS recognizes multiple
literacies, varying according to time and space. Literacy, from the perspective of
NLS, is always ideological in the sense that it is always rooted in a particular world
view which dominates and marginalizes other views of literacy. According to Street
3.1 Perspectives on Literacy 35

(1993), the ideological model subsumes rather than excludes the work undertaken
within the autonomous model (p. 9), since the latter, by disclaiming ideology, is
taking an ideological stance. Thus, the ideological model does not deny the technical
and cognitive aspects of reading and writing but rather views them as embedded in
the social and cultural contexts and within the existing power structures.
Unlike the autonomous model of literacy, which has an established repertoire of
pedagogical approaches to literacy, the ideological model faces many challenges
when it comes to the practical applications of its literacies to mainstream educa-
tion. One challenge is the multiplicity of childrens literacies if teachers are to capi-
talize on understanding childrens emerging experiences with literacy in their own
cultural milieus of literacy practices. The NLS response to that criticism is that their
aim is not to provide an exhaustive account of such contexts but rather to provide
those responsible for the education of children with an understanding of the princi-
ples underlying variation in childrens literacy practices while listening to and
appreciating what children bring to school from their home and community experi-
ences. Another challenge to ideological pedagogical approaches is the overempha-
sis of NLS on the local, which poses a conict between theory and policy and
between the local and the global. The response of NLS to this challenge is that, in
applying the principles of ideological literacy, educators ought to be mindful of the
need to analyze what literacy events and practices mean to users in different cultural
and social contexts.

3.1.3 Critical Literacy

Literacy is the cornerstone of Freires emancipatory education. In fact, it is his expe-

rience in his self-initiated adult literacy programs in Brazil that helped inspire and
shape his view of emancipatory education. He developed what he called critical
literacy, which is based on developing critical consciousness of the world. In
Literacy: Reading the Word and the World (Freire & Macedo, 1987), Freire outlines
his own conceptions of reading and writing as follows:
Reading the world always precedes reading the word, and reading the word implies con-
tinually reading the world. As I suggested earlier, this movement from the word to the world
is always present; even the spoken word ows from our reading of the world. In a way,
however, we can go further and say that reading the word is not preceded merely by reading
the world, but by a certain form of writing it or rewriting it, that is, of transforming it by
means of conscious, practical work. For me, this dynamic movement is central to the liter-
acy process (p. 35).

As is clear, Freires conception of literacy is based on dialectical relationships

between reading and writing the word and reading and writing the world. He rst
posits that reading the world, i.e., experiencing things, precedes reading the writ-
ten word that describes the world. He then claries that reading the world will
continually lead to reading the word, i.e., to more critical consciousness of the
world. He also views that writing the world by transforming it by means of con-
scious, practical work precedes the reading of the word. This dialectical relation
36 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

between reading and writing the world on the one hand and reading and writing of
the word on the other continually shapes our consciousness of the world.
Besides reading and writing the word in order to read and write the world, Freire
posits that consciousness of the world should not be only an act of knowledge but
also an act of critical consciousness:
literacy as an act of knowledge, as a creative act and as a political act, is an effort to read
the world and the word. Now it is no longer to have the text without context (p. 43).

Freires approach to literacy pedagogy is based on two elementsFreire rst

advocates the cultural circle, which involves a dialogical approach to literacy based
on principles of a reciprocal exchange from which meanings emerge. These would
critique and transform binary relationships of oppressed and oppressor, teacher and
learner. Freire then advocates naming of the world, which helps transform reality
from things in the present moment to activities, processes, to becoming (Berthoff,
1987, p. xv). Berthoff writes that Freires idea of naming the world is to be able to
hold it in mind and reect on its meaning in order to imagine a changed world. Thus,
language becomes a means for social consciousness, i.e., the means of conceiving
of change and making choices to bring about further transformations (p. xv).
Freires view of critical literacy ts the ideological model of literacy while put-
ting special emphasis on literacy as a means of emancipation. In conformity with
the ideological model of literacy, critical literacy does not view literacy as the tech-
nical linguistic skills of reading and writing. In line with ideological literacy, critical
literacy allows for multiple literacies within different contexts of the same culture or
across different cultures. Also, critical literacy is rooted in an ideology of emancipa-
tion and as such has its own world view, as anticipated by ideological literacy. The
main difference is that critical literacy has grown out of educational goals and prac-
tices, whereas ideological literacy is rooted in social science theories.

3.1.4 Literacy as a Cultural Capital

In his theory of cultural reproduction, Bourdieu maintains that literacy is a signi-

cant aspect of cultural capital. Bourdieu introduces three concepts to explain liter-
acy as capital: habitus, eld, and capital. Bourdieu starts from the idea that human
action is constituted through a dialectical relation between the individuals thought
and activity and the objective world (Grenfell & James, 1998, p. 14). The habitus
(the active schemes of thought, perception, and action formed of past experience)
tends to shape the constancy of the individuals practices over time. The linguistic
habitus (the language and consequent thoughts that individuals acquired during past
experience) tends to shape literacy practices throughout the life of individuals.
A linguistic field is a social network with identiable structure of positions and
relations which imposes values on linguistic features according to social status.
The linguistic capital of an individual, shaped by habitus, takes different values
depending on the social world in which this capital is used.
3.2 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist? 37

Bourdieu (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1990) maintains that the power relationships in
the society are reproduced through the school system in which power is determined
by the relative cultural capital accorded to positions or individuals who occupy
these positions in the eld. A particular kind of cultural capital that plays a critical
role in formal schooling is linguistic capital. According to Bourdieus analysis, stu-
dents of the dominant groups, because of their habitus, possess much more linguis-
tic capital that is valued by school systems. In the school system, such linguistic
capital can be exchanged for institutional cultural capital, which can later be
exchanged for economic or social capital.

3.2 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

In order to compare mathematical literacy with language literacy, one has to dene
the essential elements of literacy. Basically, literacy assumes the existence of a sym-
bolic system that a certain culture has invented and developed for the purpose of
coding (what is said) and codifying (what is meant) a world of referents outside the
symbolic system. In language literacy, the symbolic system is the language and the
whole culture is the external world of referents. In mathematical literacy, mathemat-
ics is the symbolic system and the external world of referents is some aspects of the
culture, mainly those that relate to quantity, space, and measurement.
The rst difference between mathematical literacy and language literacy lies in
the constrained nature of the world of referents in mathematics compared to
the omnipresent nature of the world of referents of language literacy. In natural
language, literacy can code and codify all the objects and relations in a specic
culture. On the other hand, mathematics can code and codify only objects and rela-
tions of the constrained world of quantity, space, and measurement. In this sense,
mathematical literacy, if it exists at all, does so in a very constrained form, i.e.,
to the extent of its use in all aspects of culture as well as its accessibility by all
members of the culture. The constrained nature of mathematical literacy calls for
restraint when the term is used in educational contexts.
The second difference between mathematical literacy and language literacy lies
in the nature of the symbolic systems of the two literacies. Meanings in the sym-
bolic system in mathematics, at least at the scientic level, are determined by formal
denitions in terms of the symbols of the system itself, whereas meaning in lan-
guage is determined in terms of social cultural practices. The decontextualized lan-
guage of mathematics can be understood without reference to the referents of the
system outside it. When this happens, mathematical literacy loses one basic element
of the literacy of its constituency, i.e., the external world of referents. This possibil-
ity is echoed by Jablonka (2003):
the symbol system of mathematics is one that has highly decontextualised meanings
(at least when negative number, fractions and algebra are involved). So the construction of
meaning is particularly difcult in mathematics when contrasted with reading and writing
literacy (p. 82).
38 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

The third difference between mathematical literacy and language literacy exists
in the extent of orality of the two literacies. The extent of oral practices in mathe-
matical literacy is much less than that of natural language literacy. Whether inside
or outside school, the use of the oral feature of mathematical literacy for communi-
cation purposes is limited to very few instances (such as making a transaction),
whereas the orality of the natural language is a dominant mode of communication
in almost all practices.

3.3 Perspectives on Mathematical Literacy

Traditionally, functional literacy included the Rs, reading, writing, and arithmetic.
In the second half of the last century, and with the rising trend to unite arithmetic,
algebra, and geometry in school curricula as school mathematics, mathematical lit-
eracy came into being as a concept separate from language literacy. Starting from a
comprehensive overview and discussion of mathematical literacy as given by
Jablonka (2003), I shall try to frame and discuss the different perspectives of math-
ematical literacy in the broader context of the general theoretical construct of liter-
acy presented in Sect. 3.2 of this chapter.
Jablonka (2003) has identied ve perspectives on mathematical literacy: math-
ematical literacy for developing human capital, mathematical literacy for cultural
identity, mathematical literacy for social change, mathematical literacy for environ-
mental awareness, and mathematical literacy for evaluating mathematics. In
Sect. 3.1 of this chapter, four theoretical perspectives of literacy are identied:
autonomous literacy, ideological literacy, critical literacy, and literacy as a cultural
capital.

3.3.1 Autonomous Mathematical Literacy

To t within the autonomous model of literacy, mathematical literacy should reect

the features of the autonomous model as dened by Street (1993). In the autono-
mous model, literacy is conceptualized as technical, independent of social context,
and ideologically neutral. The term autonomous refers to two ideas. One is the
idea that any communication, particularly a written one, represents an unambiguous
self-contained meaning, independently of who is making communication, and sec-
ond is that literacy in itselfautonomouslywill have effects on other social and
cognitive practices; that is, it autonomously contributes to human capital.
The human capital perspective, as characterized by Jablonka (2003), seems to
have all the features of the autonomous model of literacy. This perspective is char-
acterized by Jablonka (2003) as a conception of mathematical literacy in terms of
the ability to analyse, reason and communicate ideas and results by posing and solv-
ing mathematical problems (p. 80). Jablonka quotes the denition of literacy given
3.3 Perspectives on Mathematical Literacy 39

by the International Programme for Student Assessment (PISA) as an example of

the human capital perspective:
Mathematical literacy is the capacity to identify, to understand and to engage in mathemat-
ics and make well-founded judgements about the role that mathematics plays, as needed for
an individuals current and future life, occupational life, social life with peers and relatives,
and life as a constructive, concerned and reective citizen (p. 80).

Another conception within the human capital perspective is the concept of adult
numeracy as dened by the Project for the International Assessment of Adult
Competencies (PIAAC):
Numeracy is the ability to access, use, interpret, and communicate mathematical informa-
tion and ideas, in order to engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a range of
situations in adult life (PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group, 2009, p. 21).

Jablonka (2015) identied four differences between the mathematical literacy of

PISA and the adult numeracy of the PIAAC. PIAAC provides a denition of numer-
acy which focuses on the reading of texts rather than on mathematical modeling
(p. 604). Moreover, the numerate subject in PIAAC is not one who develops math-
ematical models as in PISA, but instead consumes outcomes of mathematisations
(p. 604). Also, a critical consumer stance is implied in PIAAC, whereas no critical
stance is implied in PISA framework. In addition, the PIAAC framework expands
its notion of numeracy beyond cognitive dimensions of skills, whereas the PISA
framework limits mathematical literacy to skills in the cognitive dimension. The
PIAAC notion of adult literacy, though broader than PISA notion of mathematical
literacy, remains within the parameters of autonomous mathematical literacy in the
sense that it is conceived as autonomous universal skills.
It is obvious that literacy, in its mathematical literacy or adult numeracy versions,
is conceptualized in terms of mathematical competencies that are autonomous. The
denitions of both mathematical literacy or adult numeracy imply that the mathe-
matical capabilities which constitute their denitions are universal in the sense that
they are not viewed as local social practices but rather assumed to be relevant in
idealized contexts, such as pollution, trafc safety, or population growth. In the
words of Jablonka, what counts in this perspective are not the situations them-
selves, which are of interest, but only their mathematical descriptions (Jablonka,
2003, p. 81). Again the human capital perspective of literacy assumes that mathe-
matical literacy, autonomously, leads to the development of the human capital of the
individual by enhancing students mathematical skills, improving student economic
prospects, and ultimately making them better citizens.

3.3.2 Ideological Mathematical Literacies

To t within the ideological model of literacy, mathematical literacy should reect

the features of the former as dened by Street (1993). The ideological model posits
that literacy is a social practice, not simply a technical and neutral skill, and that it
40 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

is always embedded in socially constructed epistemological principles. Research in

New Literacy Studies (NLS) (Street, 1993) suggests that in practice, literacy varies
from one social context to another and from one culture to another, and thus NLS
recognizes multiple literacies, varying according to time and space. Literacies, from
the perspective of NLS, are always ideological in the sense that they are always
rooted in a particular world view which aims as a view to dominate and to marginal-
ize others. The ideological model does not deny the technical and cognitive aspects
of literacy but rather views them as embedded in the social and cultural contexts and
within power structures.
Mathematical literacy for cultural identity perspective, as characterized by
Jablonka (2003), denes this perspective to include mathematical practices that are
embedded in out-of-school, workplace, or ethnomathematical practices. Though I
agree with the description of this perspective, I feel that only the ethnomathematical
context is linked directly to cultural identity, while out-of-school and workplace
contexts are not. For that reason, I prefer to call this perspective mathematical lit-
eracy for culture-making, a term used by Bruner (1986) to refer to negotiating and
recreating meaning by participants.
Regardless of what we call it, mathematical literacy for cultural identity per-
spective seems to include the feature of the ideological model of literacy. For one
thing, mathematical literacy in the cultural identity perspective is dened in terms
of mathematical practices used in social practices in out-of-school, workplace, or
ethnomathematical contexts. For another, since these mathematical practices vary
from one context to another in the same culture and from one culture to another, the
cultural identity perspective of mathematical literacy allows for multiple literacies.
Furthermore, cultural identity literacies are embedded in social-cultural ideology, in
which the social-cultural is an integral component of mathematics learning and
which stands against ideologies that marginalize the cultural and social practices in
the learning of mathematics.

3.3.3 Critical Mathematical Literacy

The perspective of mathematical literacy for social change (Jablonka, 2003) posits
a political vision aimed at critical citizenship. Mathematical literacy from this per-
spective is viewed as a means for re-interpreting parts of reality and participating
in a process of pursuing a different reality (p. 85). Almost all conceptions within
the perspective of mathematical literacy for social change imply a critical view
toward reality and are inspired by Freires critical literacy (Freire & Macedo, 1987).
The most developed critical approach to mathematical literacy is the concept of
mathemacy suggested by Skovsmose (2011). According to him, mathemacy can be
discussed in terms of:
abilities in understanding and operating with mathematical notions, algorithms and proce-
dures; it can be discussed in terms of abilities in applying all such notions, algorithms and
procedures in a variety of situations; and it can bediscussed in terms of abilities in reecting
on all then applications (p. 83).
3.3 Perspectives on Mathematical Literacy 41

Skovsmoses conception of mathemacy runs parallel to Freires concept of criti-

cal literacy. Mathemacy can be seen as a way of reading the world (developing criti-
cal consciousness of the world in terms of numbers and gures), as the actions
through which one tries to grasp social, political, cultural, and economic features of
ones life-world, and also as a way of writing the worldas the active way of chang-
ing this world through mathematics praxis, i.e., reection and action.
For him, mathemacy includes both functional literacy (applying mathematical
ideas and procedures) and critical literacy (reecting on mathematical applica-
tions). Skovsmose identies four types of practices in the domain of application of
mathemacy. The rst domain is the practices of the marginalized, which includes
identifying, representing, and quantifying features of marginalization and whose
critical side includes exposing the sources and reasons for the marginalization. This
domain is complemented by the practices of consumption, which functionally
includes using mathematics for managing all kinds of everyday economic transac-
tions, and which critically includes evaluating the processes and products of con-
sumption. Further comes the domain of practices of operation, which includes
understanding the use of mathematics in mathematics-based procedures as experi-
enced in the workplace, and whose critical dimension includes questioning and
evaluating the reliability of quantitative and symbolic information involved in the
operations. Finally, there are the practices of construction, which functionally
include the use of mathematics for developing mathematical competence in broader
technological competence and whose critical feature includes questioning the
assumption that mathematics ensures neutrality and objectivity.

3.3.4 Mathematical Literacy as a Cultural Capital

The concept of mathematical literacy as a cultural capital is little mentioned in the

discourse on mathematical literacy. On the other hand, the concept of reproduction
in mathematics education has found expression in mathematics education in differ-
ent forms, one of which is the view of mathematics as a critical lter. The question
arises whether Bourdieus analysis of the critical role of linguistic capital (as a part
of cultural capital) in reproducing the power relationships in society through the
school system may apply to mathematical capital. In other words, does the mathe-
matical capital of an individual play a similar role in school education? Williams
(2012) gives an afrmative answer to that question by suggesting that:
it is mathematics (more than language as such) that has become the marketable, educa-
tional capital that many students need to get access to the preferred courses and higher
institutions. Thus, mathematics becomes a new cultural capital of this educational eld,
which inicts symbolic violence to the extent that it reects a power that is arbitrary, and
hidden, or misrecognised (p. 67).

If this is the case, then mathematical literacy becomes a tool for reproducing the
power relationships in the society through the school system, in which power is
determined by the relative cultural capital accorded to positions or individuals
who occupy these positions in the educational eld. Students of the dominant
42 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

groups, because of their privileged habitus, possess much more mathematical

capital, allowing them to exchange it for scholastic capital and subsequently for
economic and social capital.
In summary, with the exception of mathematical literacy as capital, almost all
perspectives on mathematical literacy t within the general categories of literacy.
The human capital perspective of mathematical literacy ts within the autonomous
model of literacy, which views literacy as autonomous technical skills constituting
ideologically neutral and universal literacy. The perspective of mathematical liter-
acy as cultural identity ts within the ideological model of literacy, which views
literacy as social practice, allows for multiple literacies, and assumes that any liter-
acy is rooted in an ideology. Finally, the social change perspective of mathematical
literacy ts within critical literacy, which views literacy as a way of reading and
writing the world.

3.4 Mathematical Literacy in the UNESCOs Evolving

Notion of Literacy

UNESCOs concerns with literacy have been part of its mandate since the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 dened education as a fundamental human
right. Until the mid-1960s, UNESCOs notion of literacy was understood as a set
of technical skills: reading, writing and calculating (UNESCO, 2004, p. 8). In the
1960s and 1970s the emphasis shifted to linking literacy to socioeconomic develop-
ment through the concept of functional literacy. During this period, UNESCO
encouraged and sponsored national and international functional literacy programs
designed to promote reading and writing as well as arithmetical skills. Although
school mathematics was undergoing fundamental changes, including the unication
of traditional school mathematics subjects (arithmetic, algebra, geometry) into the
inclusive subject of mathematics at the time, the concept of mathematical literacy
was still not elaborated in formal education.
Starting in the mid-1970s, and based on its unfavorable assessment of the socio-
economic returns of functional literacy in the previous three decades while recog-
nizing the political dimension of literacy as reected in Freires work (Freire &
Macedo, 1987), UNESCO expanded its functional notion of literacy to a more polit-
ically oriented literacy as:
a set of practices dened by social relations and cultural processes a view exploring the
range of uses of literacy in the entire spectrum of daily life from the exercise of civil and
political rights through matters of work, commerce and childcare to self-instruction, spiri-
tual enlightenment and even recreation (UNESCO, 2004, p. 10).

Meanwhile, trends in mathematical literacy had started to take note of the social
and cultural dimensions of mathematics. This was reected in literacies that aimed
at cultural participation as reected in the perspective of mathematical literacy for
cultural identity explained in Sect. 3.3.2.
3.5 My Narrative About Mathematical Literacy 43

UNESCO took a further expansion of the notion of literacy in the World

Declaration on Education for All (UNICEF, 1990) by introducing the concept of
basic learning needs, featuring literacy in a continuum encompassing formal and
non-formal education for children, youth, and adults. In this conception, literacy
was linked to lifelong learning with its four pillarslearning to know, to do, to
live together, and to be.
In June 2003, UNESCO proposed an operational denition of a plural notion of
literacy:
Literacy is the ability to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate and compute
using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts. Literacy involves
a continuum of learning in enabling individuals to achieve their goals, to develop their
knowledge and potential, and to participate fully in their community and wider society
(UNESCO, 2004, p. 13).

This notion of literacy assumes that people acquire and apply literacy for differ-
ent purposes in different situations, all of which are shaped by culture, history,
language, religion and socio-economic conditions (UNESCO, 2004, p. 13).
The challenge for this notion of literacy is not its measurement as much as its ability
to incorporate this notion in the lives of individuals and to monitor and assess the
multiple forms of literacy.
There exist two discrepancies between mathematical literacy as conceived in
mathematics education and literacy as conceived by UNESCO. First, mathematical
literacy in mathematics education is conceived as consisting of quantitative, spatial,
and measurement aspects of reality, whereas UNESCOs notion of literacy includes
only numeracy in its denition. Second, mathematical literacy in mathematics edu-
cation is conceived as an autonomous literacy independent of other literacies,
whereas mathematical literacy in the UNESCOs notion of literacy views computa-
tion as only one dimension of literacy.

3.5 My Narrative About Mathematical Literacy

An understanding of both literacy and mathematical literacy has amazed and

intrigued me in my professional life. One of the issues involved has been whether
there is an autonomous stand-alone mathematical literacy. A second issue is the
etymology of the term literacy in Arabic. A third issue is the political connotation
and implications of literacy, and hence of mathematical literacy, in modern times.
The issue of stand-alone mathematical literacy versus a pluralistic multidimen-
sional construct of general literacy has profound theoretical and practical conse-
quences. In the context of Education for All, UNESCO proposed such a pluralistic
multidimensional construct of general literacy which features literacy as a contin-
uum encompassing formal and non-formal education for children, youth, and adults
in the context of basic learning needs, i.e., learning to know, to do, to live together,
and to be. To achieve and measure this goal of literacy, UNESCO gave an opera-
tional denition to literacy, which includes the ability to identify, understand,
44 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

interpret, create, communicate and compute, using printed and written materials
associated with varying contexts (UNESCO, 2004, p. 13). Obviously this concep-
tion of literacy subsumes different components of literacy, which include, among
other things, what was termed mathematical literacy. It is obvious that the unit in
UNESCOs denition of literacy is the literate person rather than any particular set
of abilities. However, how realistic is it to apply this conception of literacy?
Commendable and far-reaching as it is, UNESCOs concept of literacy requires
nothing short than revolutionizing schooling. Current schooling is based on the
concept of providing learning in specic progression (grades) and in categories of
knowledge (subjects) structured in such a way to maximize efciency of delivery.
UNESCOs concept assumes, among other things, learning trajectories that cut
across subjects. It is my belief that as long as the current schooling system main-
tains its structure (and there are many good reasons why it has to), literacy has to be
dened and developed within the connes of each subject, so we will have mathe-
matical literacy, scientic literacy, information literacy, etc. The challenge is how to
frame and develop literacy in the various school subjects within UNESCOs general
framework of literacy without necessarily changing the current structure of the
schooling system. For example, mathematical literacy may be framed as the ability
to identify, understand, interpret, create, communicate, and compute mathematical
information, using printed and written materials associated with varying contexts.
It is hoped that literacies in different subjects, if inspired and guided by UNESCOs
literacy framework, would facilitate the convergence toward a more interdisciplin-
ary conception of literacy. It should be noted, however, that non-formal education,
which is structurally less constrained than formal education, is more likely to
advance in the direction of UNESCOs conception of literacy. An example of this
is the Project for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC),
which adopts a multidimensional conception of literacy involving language, numer-
acy, and problem solving in technology-rich environments.
A second issue which has occupied me is the etymology of the term literacy in
Arabic. In Arabic (as in German as reported in Jablonka (2003)), there is no single
word for literacy, but there is a word for illiteracy (ummiyyah). This has seemed
intriguing for me for two reasons. Although the word literacy does not exist, the
word reading exists and has almost a sacred status, and illiteracy (ummiyyah) is
derived from the root (umm), which means mothera thing which, on face value,
seems to me intriguing since mother is associated, at least in modern societies,
with literacy rather than illiteracy. The sacred status of reading derives from the
fact that the Quran, the Holy Book of Islam, has a verse which calls for reading in
order to know Allah:
96. CLOT (al-Alaq)
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful
1. Read: In the Name of your Lord who created.
2. Created man from a clot.
3. Read: And your Lord is the Most Generous.
4. He who taught by the pen.
5. Taught man what he never knew.
(Itani, p. 238)
References 45

In a sense, reading is equivalent to literacy (for which no word exists in Arabic).

As for illiteracy (ummiyyah) and its relation to mother (umm) it is claried by
referring to Lissan Al-Arab (Arab Tongue), the most prestigious dictionary in the
Arabic language. According to Lissan Al-Arab, the illiterate is the one who remains
as born by his mother in the sense that he has not yet learned the Book (Quran) or
writing, the acquisition of which requires further teaching beyond that of the mother.
In other words, the reference to mother here is to say that the illiterate remains as
born (by mother) since the person is not able to read or write the Book.
The third literacy-related issue which has occupied me is how critical literacy
can actually be applied in schools. It seems that critical literacy, as originally envi-
sioned by Freire, has not been largely applied in schools. Luke (2012), for example,
documented some of the so-called critical reading approaches in American schools,
such as cognitive processes reliant upon readers background knowledge or sche-
mata, as textual analysis approaches focusing on multiple meanings, and as per-
sonal responses, which emphasize a personal response to literature. He concluded
that although these approaches went beyond what Freire characterized as banking
education, they did not go as far as incorporating political consciousness in their
reading approaches. In recognition of the difculties of incorporating authentic
critical education, Luke suggests that the deployment of the tools, attitudes, and
philosophies of critical literacy is contingent upon students and teachers everyday
relations of power, their lived problems and struggles, and their ability to navigate
the local contexts. I believe that one possible explanation of the limited success in
implementing authentic critical literacy approaches is, as Bourdieu has hypothe-
sized, that the school system is constituted, by its very formation, to reproduce the
power relationships in the society. Perhaps, the rst step in moving toward authentic
critical literacy approaches is the recognition and accounting for the dynamics in the
use of cultural capital, of which literacy is a major part, in the shaping of power
relationships in the school system.

References

Berthoff, A. E. (1987). Forward. In P. Freire & D. Macedo (Eds.), Literacy: Reading the word and
the world (pp. xixxiii). South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1990). Reproduction in education, society and culture (2nd ed.).
London: Sage Publications.
Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. South Hadley, MA:
Bergin and Garvey.
Grenfell, M., & James, D. (1998). Bourdieu and education: Acts of practical theory. London:
Framer Press.
Itani, T. Quran translated to English. Retrieved from http://www.clearquran.com/downloads/
quran-english-translation-clearquran-edition-allah.pdf
Jablonka, E. (2003). Mathematical literacy. In A. Bishop (Ed), Second international handbook of
mathematics education (pp. 75102). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Jablonka, E. (2015). The evolvement of numeracy and mathematical literacy curricula and the
construction of hierarchies of numerate or mathematically literate subjects. ZDM, 47(4),
599609.
46 3 Mathematical Literacy: Does It Exist?

Lissan Al-Arab. http://www.baheth.info/all.jsp?term=%D8%A3%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9.

Luke, A. (2012). Critical literacy: Foundational notes. Theory into Practice, 51(1), 411.
PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group. (2009). PIAAC numeracy: A conceptual framework. OECD edu-
cation working papers, No. 35. Paris: OECD Publishing. Doi: 10.1787/220337421165.
Skovsmose, O. (2011). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Street, B. V. (1993). Cross-cultural approaches to literacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
UNICEF. (1990). World declaration on education for all and framework for action to meet basic
learning needs. In World Conference on Education for All, Jomtien, Thailand. Jomtien:
UNESCO.
UNESCO Education Sector. (2004). The plurality of literacy and its implications for policies and
programs: Position paper (p. 13). Paris: United National Educational, Scientic and Cultural
Organization.
Williams, J. (2012). Use and exchange value in mathematics education: contemporary CHAT
meets Bourdieus sociology. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 5772.
 Part II
The Perspectives
Chapter 4
Activity Theory as a Foundation
of Real-World Problem Solving
in School Mathematics

Activity is the unit of life that is mediated by mental reflection.

The real function of this unit is to orient the subjects in the
world of objects. In other words, activity is not a reaction or
aggregate of reactions, but a system with its own structure, its
own internal transformations, and its own development.
(Leontev, 1981, p. 46)

4.1 Introduction

This chapter forms a foundational chapter for this book. For one thing, the cultural
historical activity theory (CHAT), the theme of this chapter, serves as the theoretical
basis for developing the multiple-perspective framework of learning and teaching
real-world problem solving in school mathematics, the goal of this book. Moreover,
activity theory is also one of the five perspectives of the framework of learning and
teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics.
Unlike other chapters, this chapter is presented in two distinct parts. Part 1
focuses on activity theory and how it links to problem solving. It begins by introduc-
ing the three generations of activity theory and the different perspectives on this
theory. Building on that background, problem solving is analyzed from the perspec-
tive of activity theory. Next, problem solving in school mathematics and real-world
problem solving activity are analyzed and contrasted from the perspective of activ-
ity system. Part 2, on the other hand, uses the third generation of activity theory to
develop the interconnected activity system consisting of the two interacting, yet
different, activity systems of problem solving in school mathematics and in real-
world problem solving. This interconnected activity system serves as the main theo-
retical tool for framing the multiple perspective of learning and teaching real-world
problem solving in school mathematics. Based on the former analysis, part 2
explores possible interfaces between problem solving in school mathematics and
real-world problem solving by resorting to the construct of boundary crossing
between two interacting, yet different, communities of practice.
Part 1: Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Activity Theory

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 49

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_4
50 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

4.2 Development of Activity Theory

According to Engestrm (2001), cultural-historical activity theory developed in

three stages: basic individual human activity (Vygotsky), collective human activity
(Leontev and Engestrm), and interacting activity system (Engestrm). The first
generation was ushered by Vygotskys (1978) idea of cultural mediation of actions,
in which the conditioned direct connection between stimulus (S) and response (R)
is transcended by a complex mediated act. Vygotskys idea of cultural mediation
of actions is commonly represented as a triangle with subject, object, and mediating
artifact as vertices (Fig. 4.1).
The second generation was ushered by Leontev (1981) who expanded the con-
cept of individual activity to a collective activity by introducing the element of divi-
sion of labor as an essential component of collective activity. It was left to Engestrm
(1987) to formally introduce and represent collective activity as an activity system.
The activity system is a collective purposeful activity in which a subject (or sub-
jects) is engaged to attain an object shared by a community, using mediating arti-
facts, where responsibilities are assigned collectively among members of the
community (division of labor) according to policies within the social cultural con-
text (rules). In the representation of the school as an activity system (Fig. 4.2), the

Fig. 4.1 Individual human

Mediating artifacts
activity

Subject Object

Mediating artifacts (Material & symbolic tools)

Subjects Object (Student

(Students ) learning)

Rules (School polices Community (School Division of labor (School

and social norms) community ) community members )

Fig. 4.2 School as an activity system

4.2 Development of Activity Theory 51

Mediating
Mediating
artifacts
artifacts

Object 2 Subject
Subject Object 1

Division Community Rules

Community Division of
Rules of labor
labor

Shared object

Fig. 4.3 The interconnected activity system formed by two activity systems

school community (students, teachers and other school staff, parents) is constituted
of a student or classes (subject) engaged in symbolic and material tools (mediating
artifacts) to learn (object) according to school policies (rules) and according to a
specific division of labor.
The third generation of activity theory was articulated by Engestrm (2001) by
introducing the construct of different interacting activity systems, which occurs
when one or more activity systems form a network in order to work together
towards a shared or collaboratively constructed common object. This intercon-
nected system forms, in turn, a new activity system which can account for the
actions of individuals and groups within it. The development of the interconnected
activity system came in response to the criticism that, because it focuses on the
interaction within one system, the second generation of activity system was not
sensitive to cultural diversity, which requires interaction among different activity
systems. Figure 4.3 is a schematic diagram of an interconnected activity system of
two interacting activity systems.
Engestrm (2001) articulated five principles for interacting systems to be consid-
ered as one activity system. The first principle is that the system formed by the
interacting activity systems be a collective, artifact-mediated, and object-oriented
system. The second is that the interconnected system allows multi-voices by
enabling participants to carry their own diverse histories, within the artifacts, rules,
and conventions of the system. The third is that of historicity in that the intercon-
nected activity system can only be understood against the history of the interacting
activity system. The fourth is that the interconnected activity system allows for
internal contradictions as sources of change and development. The fifth principle is
that the interconnected activity system allows for expansive transformations which
enable the system to reconceptualize its object to embrace a qualitative transforma-
tion in its mode of activity.
52 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

4.3 Perspectives on Activity Theory

Contemporary activity theory is not a single theory but more of a generic one.
According to Roth, Radford, and LaCroix (2012), activity theory, in its attempt to
encompass the diversity of activities that human beings carry out in everyday life,
has been developed in different directions and has been applied in different fields.
However, the resulting variety of activity perspectives share the essential recogni-
tion of subject, object, community, material and semiotic tools, and other features
of cultural practice as constitutive moments of activitythe minimum unit of anal-
ysis which cannot be reduced. A survey of activity theory literature reveals four
perspectives on activity theory: activity as a psychological process, activity as a
transformation process, activity as a cultural historical process, and activity as a
systematic-structural process. All four perspectives are present in the various ver-
sions of activity theory; however, the heavy emphasis on one or more activity theory
features has led to different approaches to activity theory. The discussion below
explains and gives examples of the four features of activity theory.

4.3.1 Activity as a Psychological Process

Leontev, the father of activity theory, was a psychologist interested in how human
consciousness and personality are shaped by the activities individuals are engaged
in (1978). Leontev, (1981) defined activity as:
the unit of life that is mediated by mental reflection. The real function of this unit is to
orient the subjects in the world of objects. In other words, activity is not a reaction or aggre-
gate of reactions, but a system with its own structure, its own internal transformations, and
its own development. (p. 46).

A central assertion of activity theory is that our knowledge of the world is medi-
ated by our interaction with it, and thus human behavior and thinking occur within
meaningful contexts as people conduct purposeful goal-directed activities. This
theory strongly advocates socially organized human activity rather than mind or
behavior as the major unit of analysis in psychological studies. Leontev identifies
several interrelated levels or abstractions in his theory of activity, each associated
with a special type of unit of analysis. The most general level is associated with the
unit of activity that deals with specific real activities, such as work, play, and
learning. The second level of analysis focuses on the unit of goal-directed action,
the process subordinated to a conscious goal. The third level of analysis is associ-
ated with the unit of operation or the conditions under which an action is carried out.
Operations help actualize the general goal, making it more concrete.
Human activity can be realized in two forms: internal (or mental) activity and
external activity (that with a practical objective) (Leontev, 1981). The fundamental,
primary form of human activity is external and practical. This form brings humans
into direct contact with objects, thus redirecting, changing, and enriching the activ-
ity. The internal plane of activity, however, is formed as a result of internalizing
4.3 Perspectives on Activity Theory 53

external processes. Internalization is the transition in which external processes

with external, material objects are transformed into processes that take place at the
mental level, the level of consciousness (Zinchenko & Gordon, 1981, p. 74).

4.3.2 Activity as a Transformation Process

Activity theory links the idea of transformation to the dialectic ontology of Marx
and Engel. Transformation comes as a result of inner contradictions as humans
engage in concrete activities in a dynamically changing world. These inner contra-
dictions, among and within the components, make both the participants and the
system as a whole transform themselves to actually respond to them. Transformation
occurs as new learning both at the individual and collective levels as a result of
appropriating these inner contradictions.
Engestrm (2001) developed the theory of expansive learning to explain the
learning of concepts and skills of phenomena that, by their nature, cannot be identi-
fied ahead of time. He claims that people and organizations are all the time learning
something that is not stable or even defined ahead of time. Such learning cannot be
explained by standard theories of learning, which assume that the knowledge or
skill to be acquired is itself stable and reasonably well defined. The object of
expansive learning activity is the entire activity system in which the learners are
engaged. Expansive learning activity produces culturally new patterns of activity
(Engestrm, 2001, p. 139).

4.3.3 Activity as a Cultural Historical Process

Roth (Roth et al., 2012) considers the triads (activity, history, culture) as the essen-
tial pillars reflected in its name cultural historical activity theory (CHAT). The
theory implies that human activity is temporal because it consists of an event that
can be only understood in the local context in which it occurs. It is historical because
its meaning can only be understood in terms of the events that shaped the activity up
to this moment. It is cultural because it is embedded in mediating artifacts which
are, by their nature, cultural tools. The three pillars (activity, history, culture) of
CHAT make human activity radically different from individual construction of the
world that is atemporal, ahistorical, and acultural because its by-and-large biologi-
cally articulated (p. 7).

4.3.4 Activity as a Systematic-Structural Process

This feature of activity uses activity system as an analytic structural tool to continu-
ously improve organizational performance, i.e., efficiency, effectiveness, and cost
saving. This approach was presented by von Brevern and Synytsya (2005) and given
54 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

the name of systemic-structural theory of activity (SSTA). It analyzes human

(or human-machine) systems to improve the system as a whole rather than under-
standing individual human activity in its temporal, historical, and cultural contexts.

4.4 Problem Solving from the Perspective of Activity Theory

Human problem solving may be enacted individually in the context of personal life
or collectively by an individual or group of individuals in a community which shares
a common goal. As a member of a community of practice, a teacher in a certain
school shares the common goal of providing learning for students with all members
of the school community. While practicing teaching, the teacher faces problems
which require decisions that have to be made taking into consideration school rules,
resources, and context. On the other hand, the same teacher may face problems in
the personal domain that require different tools. This section presents individual and
collective problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world.
Problem solving has all the features of a human activity as viewed from the per-
spective of CHAT. It is first a goal-oriented artifact-mediated human endeavor.
Moreover, by its nature, problem solving aims at a decision to take action or adopt
a solution to resolve a certain difficulty. It is also artifact mediated because the
problem-solving process may use all available tools to address the problem at hand.
It furthermore is dialectical in nature because it aims at removing an inner contra-
diction arising from inner contradictions between and among the subject, the medi-
ating artifacts, and the object of the activity. In addition, problem solving, by
definition, is temporal in the sense that it occurs in specific space-time context, and
it is historical since it is not likely to be understood fully without calling on the
relevant history of the problem in the specific local context. Finally, problem solv-
ing is a cultural process because its object as an activity derives its meaning from
the cultural context, and the artifacts that are used to reach the goal are also cultural
products.

4.4.1 Real-World Problem Solving as an Individual Activity

Problem solving in the real world refers to situations which require decision making
in the context of work or the management of personal life. These situations arise as
part of the normal life of the individual and have to be resolved promptly using all
available resources. An individual activity is shaped by the triad of subject, mediat-
ing artifacts, object, and the interactions among them. In this respect, mediating
artifacts include material, mental, and social tools. Examples of material tools are
actual physical tools or symbolic tools such as the Internet. Examples of mental
tools include language, mathematics, and modeling among other things. Social
tools include seeking help from others. The upper triangle of Fig. 4.4 represents
real-world problem solving as an individual activity.
4.4 Problem Solving from the Perspective of Activity Theory 55

Mediating artifacts (All available

artifacts)

Object (Solving real word

Subjects (Individuals)
PS - decisions)

Rules (Social-cultural Community ( Family and Division of labor

norms) peers) ( Family and peers)

Fig. 4.4 Activity system of problem solving in the real world

4.4.2 Real-World Problem Solving as a Collective Activity

Although they are engaged in problem solving in their real-world private space,
individuals are often engaged in problem solving which involves a certain commu-
nity such as family or peers. In this way, problem solving may be represented by an
activity system. Figure 4.4 is a schematic diagram of the activity system of real-
world problem solving. The student in the real-world model acts as an individual in
a community without being identified as a student in a school community. The com-
munity in the real world consists of the immediate community of the individual that
may be involved in decision making, such as family and peers. The problem in the
real world is not a written task given by others but rather a non-mathematical situa-
tion that is identified and defined by the individual and calls for a decision, normally
resulting in an action. All available symbolic and material artifacts are at the dis-
posal of the individual. The rules consist of social and cultural norms, and the divi-
sion of labor is distributed among the community as decided by the individual,
family, and peers.

4.4.3 School Mathematics Problem Solving

as an Individual Activity

Problem solving in the school mathematics context refers to a situation where the
student is engaged in problem-solving tasks as part of an instructional sequence
and as applications to mathematical concepts, principles, and algorithms taught.
The components of subject, mediating artifacts, object, and the interactions among
them are mostly shaped by the school context.
56 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

According to Engestrm (1987), from an activity-theoretic perspective, the

identity of a student in school mathematics problem-solving activity is a product
and by-product of this activity. Therefore, students, and even teachers, are not
only engaged in producing solutions to mathematical problems but also produce
and reproduce themselves as participants in that activity. Thus, the identity of a
student engaging in school mathematics problem solving is not a constituent of
that activity, but it is made and remade as a result of acting in multiple activity
systems, such as school and real-world systems (Roth et al., 2004). The goal of
school mathematics problem solving is to solve mathematical problem tasks,
most often assigned by the teacher. The outcome of problem solving in school
mathematics is a written answer to the question raised in the problem task or a
written response showing the steps of the solution. The normal criterion for the
validity of the solution is its mathematical correctness. Normally, little attention is
given to the relevance of the solution to real life, the strategy used in solving the
problem, or the reporting of the solution in other formats such as narrative dis-
course. The mediating artifacts used in school problem solving are also deter-
mined, implicitly or explicitly, by the teacher and/or school. In most cases they
include mathematical (concepts, procedures, strategies), linguistic tools, and dif-
ferent instructional formats. Generally, social tools such as seeking the help of
more experienced or competent people are discouraged as is the use of the Internet.
The upper triangle of Fig. 4.5 represents individual problem-solving activity in
school mathematics.

Mediating artifacts (Math & language)

Object (Learning sch. PS

Subjects (Students) written solutions)

Rules (School polices Community (Teacher Division of labor

and social norms) and class mates) (Teacher and class
mates)

Fig. 4.5 Structure of activity system school mathematics problem solving

4.5 Contrasting Problem Solving in School Mathematics and Real World 57

4.4.4 School Mathematics Problem Solving

as a Collective Activity

School mathematics problem solving is not only an individual activity but also col-
lective since it is enacted in participation with a community consisting of classmates
and the teacher. Enacting the school problem-solving activity within the school
community necessitates the existence of some rules to regulate the actions of the
activity among the group members and also the existence of a division of labor in
order to distribute the sections of the activity among the participants. Normally, the
rules that govern enacting school mathematics problem solving come from two
sources: social and cultural norms of the school context and the school rules and
regulations that reflect the school mission. Classroom organization in terms of seat-
ing students may reflect a social norm about how people interact, and it affects the
instructional format (whole class, group, or individual formats). The division of
labor in school mathematics problem solving is normally done by the teacher who
defines the roles of the teacher and students, as individuals or as a group, in the
classroom activity. It is well established in the educational literature that distribu-
tion of responsibilities between teacher and students affects the nature and quality
of student learning and outcomes. Figure 4.5 is a schematic diagram of the structure
of school mathematics problem-solving activity system.

4.5 Contrasting Problem Solving in School Mathematics

and Real World

Enacting problem solving in school mathematics is very different from that in the
real world in many respects. In the real world the individual decides whether a prob-
lem exists or not, defining and posing the problem, whereas in school mathematics,
the teacher determines that a certain task is a problem, and the teacher or the text-
book states the problem. In school mathematics the problem task is presented ver-
bally or orally in the form of a statement or a drawing, whereas in the real world the
problem is experienced, is normally semiotic, and is only expressed orally if there is
a need to communicate it to others. In the real world the individual determines when
and where to solve the problem, usually with a concrete action that can be executed
at the will of the individual, whereas in school mathematics the teacher decides the
time and place for solving the problem, with the solution symbolically represented
by numbers, equations, or language. While in the real world the individual deter-
mines the adequacy of the solution in terms of its contribution to removing or eas-
ing the difficulty that caused the problem, leading to intrinsic emotional satisfaction,
the successful solution of a problem in school mathematics leads mostly to a sym-
bolic reward expressed in praise or a grade and sometimes to intrinsic satisfaction.
From an activity-theoretic perspective, identity is not a stable characteristic of
individuals but rather is made and remade as the activity in which they participate is
enacted or when they participate in multiple activity systems (Roth et al., 2004). From
58 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

Table 4.1 Contrasting problem solving in school mathematics and the real-world activity systems
Node School math problem solving Real-world problem solving
Object/outcome Learning school mathematics problems/ Solving real-world problems/
written solutions decisions for actions
Subject/identity Has the identity of a student in a school Has the identity of an
individual in a community
Mediating artifacts Math and language All available artifacts
Community Teachers and classmates Family and peers
Rules Sociocultural norms and school rules Sociocultural norms
Division of labor Distributed among teacher and students Distributed among family
and peers

the previous section it seems that a student in the activity of solving mathematical
problems in school has the identity of a person who has little control over the selec-
tion, posing, representing, and choosing when and where to solve a problem. Also,
the student has little say in evaluating the solution and relating it to personal experi-
ences. On the other hand, an individual in an activity of solving problems in the real
world has almost full control over all aspects of problem solving.
Students have to make and remake their identities as they move from the activity
of problem solving in the real world to that in school mathematics. Crossing the
boundary between these two systems requires students to remake their identities
almost on a daily basis. This readjustment of identity can be a source of frustration
for students on the one hand and a source of change and growth on the other, if those
two activity systems are interconnected in a meaningful way.
In summary, the discrepancies between the problem solving in school mathemat-
ics and the real-world activity systems include contradictions among all nodes of
the activity systems. Table 4.1 summarizes the contradictions between the nodes of
the two systems.

4.6 Overview of Problem-Solving Research That Used

Activity Theory Framework

In this section I review typical research studies that used, explictly or implicitly, any
of the three generations of CHAT, regardless whether the research context was
inside or outside the school setting. Two articles that reviewed studies using activity
theory explicitly were consulted (Nussbaumer, 2012; Roth, Leeb, & Hsu, 2009) as
was one article that reviewed studies on cognition-in-practice, some of which could
be interpreted from the perspective of activity theory (Greiffenhagen & Sharrock,
2008). The selected studies were categorized according to how they applied activity
theory to problem solving in three contexts: sociocultural, workplace, and science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
4.6 Overview on Problem-Solving Research That Used Activity Theory Framework 59

4.6.1 Social-Cultural Context

Of the ten studies selected, six addressed the role of features of activity theory in
social-cultural contexts as it pertains to real-world problem solving in school math-
ematics. Using the theoretical framework of activity theory and within the context of
science and mathematics (modeling), Prins et al. (2008) designed a strategy to make
modeling meaningful from students perspectives. The strategy involved exploring,
analyzing, and selecting authentic chemical modeling practices for use in chemistry
education. The suitability of the practices was reviewed by applying a procedure
consisting of several steps focused on certain criteria such as students interest and
ownership, modeling procedure, issue knowledge, and feasibility of the laboratory
work in the classroom. It concluded that modeling drinking-water treatment and
human exposure assessment are both suitable to serve as contexts, because both
practices exhibit clear motives for model construction, and the applied modeling
procedures are in line with students pre-existing procedural modeling knowledge.
Stone and Gutirrez (2007) conducted a study involving a local adaptation of the
Fifth Dimension known as Las Redes (i.e., Networks of Collaboration in the Fifth
Dimension), which has the unique design of creating an environment in which
multi-aged participants who are members of various cultural communities are
encouraged to coordinate their efforts on educational tasks. The study examined
how the multiple activity systems of the undergraduate course and the school and
university communities, all organized around cultural-historical activity theories of
learning and development, promote learning among undergraduate and elementary
school children. In particular, the study focused on a particular social situation of
development (a computer game requiring complex mathematical concepts) in which
the social organization of learning and forms of mediation available inspired new
forms of participation and assistance. The authors observed that the practice of
experienced undergraduates of interweaving different forms of assessment and
assistance strategies led to changes in childrens participation over time. As a con-
sequence, the childs form of participation shifted from receiver of explicit informa-
tion to one of sole or co-decision maker. The authors concluded that the way
individuals interpret and articulate problems, the mediation strategies they use, and
how they define and negotiate their roles and responsibilities for knowledge produc-
tion are related to their local community and its history of practices.
Jurdak (2006) contrasted theoretically and empirically the problem solving of
situated problems in school and the real world. Three potentially experiential prob-
lem tasks were given to 31 last year high school students in the scientific stream.
Qualitative methods were used to analyze the data obtained from the written solu-
tions as well as interviews with the participants. Leontevs activity theory and
Engestrms activity system were employed as frameworks to analyze and interpret
the data. The results indicated that there are fundamental identifiable differences
among the activities and the activity systems of problem solving in the real world,
situated, and school contexts. Jurdak and Shahin (2001) compared and contrasted
the nature of spatial reasoning by practitioners (plumbers) in the workplace and
students in the school setting while constructing solids with given specifications,
60 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

from plane surfaces. Data were collected from a plumbing workshop and five high
school students while constructing a cylindrical container of capacity 1 L and height
of 20 cm. The results confirmed the power of activity theory and its methodology in
explaining and identifying differences between the two activities in the two differ-
ent cultural settings. Students and plumber activity structures differed in the opera-
tional aspect (actions) and the means and concrete conditions (operations) under
which the goal was carried out. Activity theory has the potential to explain the dif-
ferences between the two activities in terms of the differences in motive, social-
cultural setting, tools that were available and accessible (which resulted in different
actions), and constraints (operations) under which the task was executed. The chal-
lenge here is in working out the modalities for reorienting the mathematics
curriculum to build bridges between conceptual tools mathematics (signifier objects)
and concrete tools (signified objects in the real world).
Jurdak and Shahin (1999) examined the computational strategies of ten young
street vendors in Beirut by describing, comparing, and analyzing the computational
strategies used in solving three types of problems in two settings: transactions in the
workplace, word problems, and computation exercises in a school-like setting. The
results indicate that the vendors use of semantically based mental computational
strategies was more predominant in transactions and word problems than in compu-
tation exercises, whereas written school-like computational strategies were used
more frequently in computation exercises than in word problems and transactions.
There was clear evidence of more effective use of logical-mathematical properties
in transactions and word problems than in computation exercises. Moreover, the
success rate associated with each of the transactions and word problems was much
higher than that associated with computation exercises.
Two studies conducted in the tradition of cognition in practice may also be inter-
preted within the activity theory framework. Masingila (1994) studied how carpet
layers give meaning to and use of mathematical concepts and processes in their
installation and estimation activities. Noss, Pozzi, and Hoyles (1999) conducted a
study to investigate the meanings of average and variation as displayed by pediatric
nurses, by tracing how such meanings shape and are shaped by the nurses interpre-
tations of trends in patient and population data. The research indicates that the intro-
duction of reality into the classroom is problematic because the epistemologies of
everyday practice and mathematics are different and seldom touched by accident.

4.6.2 Workplace Context

Of the ten studies selected, three addressed the role of elements of activity theory in
workplace contexts as it pertains to real-world problem solving in school mathemat-
ics. Williams and Wake (2007) tried to ground CHAT in studies of workplace prac-
tices from a mathematical point of view. Using multiple case study visits by college
students and teacher-researchers to workplaces, they reported that mathematical
4.6 Overview on Problem-Solving Research That Used Activity Theory Framework 61

processes that are shaped by workplace culturesits instruments, rules, and divisions
of labortend to disguise or hide mathematics (black boxes). Two black boxes were
identified. The first was automation, which involves instruments, tools, and routines,
and which tends to distribute and hide mathematical work, thus defining a distinct
workplace genre of mathematical practice. The second black box involved protect-
ing subunits of the community from mathematics by a division of labor supported by
communal rules, norms, and expectations. The authors explained contradictions
between workplace and college practices to draw inferences for better alignment of
college programs with the needs of students.
Fitzsimons (2005) tried to incorporate findings from theoretical and case study
research into adult numeracy in the workplace in order to identify considerations in
the development of technology-mediated mathematics education for learners at the
post-compulsory level. Drawing on a sociocultural activity theory, his study sug-
gests that the use of technology should be aligned with the intended goals of the
learning, and at the same time takes into account contexts both inside and outside
the institution in order to develop mathematical knowledge and skills that may be
used in pursuing extra-mathematical objectives.
Williams, Wake, and Boreham (2001) reported on a case study of college math-
ematics and chemistry student struggles to make sense of the graphical output of an
experiment in an industrial chemistry laboratory. The analysis of students attempts
to interpret the unfamiliar graphical conventions was done from the perspective of
activity theory. The study revealed the limitations of the college mathematics cur-
riculum in preparing students to make sense of workplace graphical output.
However, some of the studies that were done in the context of cognition in practice,
though they did not use activity theory explicitly, can be interpreted from the per-
spective of activity theory.

4.6.3 STEM Context

One of the ten studies selected addressed the role of features of activity theory in the
workplace context as it pertains to real-world problem solving in school mathemat-
ics. In an environment which integrated the four STEM subjects, i.e., science, tech-
nology, engineering (design), and mathematics, Norton, McRobbie, and Ginns (2007)
used activity theory as an analytic tool to examine the effect of two different teacher
goals and rules enacted on student use of the flow chart planning tool, and the tools
of the programming language lab view and Lego construction to determine student
social construction of meaning. It was found that the articulation of two different
teachers goals via rules and divisions of labor helped to form distinct communities
of learning and influenced the development of different problem-solving strategies.
Part 2: The Interconnected Activity System of School Mathematics and Real-
World Problem Solving
62 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

4.7 Interfacing School Mathematics and Real-World

Problem Solving

School mathematics and real-world problem solving activity systems are two differ-
ent but necessarily interacting activity systems by virtue of the fact that the subjects
in the two systems are the same individuals but have to assume different identities
according to the system they are functioning in. Although different, the goals of the
two systems should be coordinated since one major goal of school education is to
apply school problem solving in the real world. Schools by their nature are set by
society as institutions that provide socialization as well as learning, in a certain time
span, of a vast volume of knowledge accumulated over centuries of human civiliza-
tion. Hence, it is not socially or economically feasible or even desirable to merge
school and the real world by either de-schooling society or transforming learning
into an apprenticeship. Therefore, the school and the real world have to form a net-
work in order to work together towards a collaboratively constructed common
object, which is learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics. One
way to do this is to forge a partnership between school mathematics and the real
world by forming an interconnected activity system which, in turn, forms a new
activity system promoting and supporting the actions of individuals and groups
within it to achieve the shared goal of learning real-world problem solving.
Figure 4.6 represents the structure of the interconnected system of the school math-
ematics, and of the real-world problem-solving activity systems.
For interacting systems to be considered as one interconnected activity system, it
needs to satisfy the five principles articulated by Engestrm (2001). The first prin-
ciple is that the system formed by the interacting activity systems be a collective,
artifact-mediated, and object-oriented system. The interconnected system formed of
problem solving in the school and problem solving in the real world is a collective
activity mediated by artifacts, some of which are shared by the two communities of
practice and have the common object of learning real-world problem solving. The
second principle states that the interconnected system allows for multi-voicing by
enabling participants to carry their own diverse histories, within the artifacts, rules,
and conventions of the system. The interconnected system of school and real-world
problem solving allows the same subjects (students) to maintain their diverse histo-
ries as members of the two communities of practice (problem solving in school and
the real world). The third principle is also satisfied since the historicity in the inter-
connected systems of school mathematics and real-world problem solving activity
can only be understood against the history of interacting activity systems. The inter-
connected activity system of school mathematics and real-world problem solving
satisfies the fourth principle since it allows for internal contradictions between the
two systems to be sources of change and development. The fifth principle is also
satisfied since the interconnected activity system of the school mathematics and
real-world problem solving activity allows for expansive transformations, which
enables the interconnected system to reconceptualize its object of learning real-
world problem solving in school mathematics to embrace a qualitative transforma-
tion in its mode of activity.
4.7 Interfacing School Mathematics and Real-World Problem Solving 63

a School math problem solving activity system

Mediating artifacts (Math
& language )

)
Object (Learning sch.
Subjects PS written solutions)
(Students)

Rules (School Community Division of labor

polices and (Teacher and (Teacher and
social norms) class mates) class mates)

b Real world problem solving activity

system
Mediating artifacts
(All available artifacts)

Object
Subjects (Solving real word PS Constructed object:
(Individuals) (decisions) Solving real world
problem solving in
school math

Rules (Social- Community Division of

cultural norms) ( Family and labor ( Family
peers) and peers)

Fig. 4.6 Structure of the interconnected activity system of problem solving in school mathematics
and in real-world problem-solving activity systems

4.7.1 Alternative Conceptualizations of Interfacing Interacting

Activity Systems

The literature suggests that there are at least two conceptualizations of interfacing
different but interacting activity systems: Boundary crossing and identity making/
remaking. These two competing alternative conceptualizations of interfacing inter-
acting activity systems start from the theoretical framework that underlies the three
generations of cultural historical theory originally (CHAT) but differ in their inter-
pretations of the processes by which the interface takes place.
64 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

Akkerman and Bakker (2011) define a boundary as:

a sociocultural difference leading to discontinuity in action or interaction. Boundaries
simultaneously suggest a sameness and continuity in the sense that within discontinuity two
or more sites are relevant to one another in a particular way (p. 133).

For example, not being able to use school-taught knowledge in the real world is
an example of discontinuity. To establish or restore continuity in action or interac-
tion, individuals and groups need to make an effort to cross the boundary between
the two social worlds by the learning mechanisms at the boundary, which essen-
tially aim at appropriating the hybrid meaning of boundary. Unlike Akkerman and
Bakker (2011), who use the third generation of activity theory of interconnected
activity systems (Engestrm, 2001) to rationalize boundary crossing between differ-
ent but interacting social worlds, Roth (2014) uses the foundational concept of indi-
vidual activity as suggested by Leontev (1978) to explain the individual integration
of learning in two different social worlds. Roths thesis is based on two theoretical
categories: the idea of the individual human as agency in the activity system and the
idea of subjectification, which involves:
a process by means of which the individual person continuously changes: As the produc-
tive subject of labor, the person becomes more knowledgeable and skilled and, as the
patient of activity, the person is subject(ed) to the activity and the societal relations that
come with it. A person undergoes subjectification in each and every activity where he/she
participates in the course of the day, week, or month (Roth, 2014, p.179).

Although Bakker and Akkerman (2014) and Roth (2014) start from activity the-
ory, they develop different explanations for integrating learning in different activity
systems. Roth posits that participating in a different activity system means that the
person is differently constituted as a subject in each activity system through the
process of subjectification. In other words, according to Roth, the identity of an
individual is made and remade as activity is enacted and when individuals partici-
pate in multiple activity systems (Roth et al., 2009). On the other hand, Bakker and
Akkerman theorize that participating in an activity in a different activity system
means that this same person is conceptually a different subject engaging in different
practicesa situation which requires crossing the boundary between the two differ-
ent activity systems.
For the purpose of this book I find it more useful to adopt the boundary crossing
rather than the subjectification interpretation. I believe that the two interpretations
have almost no difference in terms of their explanatory function but differ in their
object. Both boundary crossing and subjectification allow that individuals assume
different identities in two different activity systems; however, subjectification
implies that identity remaking is left to the individual, whereas boundary crossing
implies that for individuals to voice their own perspectives and recognize the per-
spective in the other system intervention from an external mechanism is needed.
Formal educational settings generally imply some kind of intervention, and as such
tend to benefit more from the boundary crossing than the subjectification
interpretation. Since my book is about learning and teaching real-world problem
solving in school mathematics, I am adopting the boundary crossing rather than the
subjectification interpretation.
4.8 Crossing the Boundary Between School Mathematics and Real-World Problem 65

4.8 Crossing the Boundary Between School Mathematics

and Real-World Problem Solving

Establishing that the interconnected activity system may act as an activity system
does not automatically warrant that the two system componentsproblem solving
in school mathematics and in the real worldinteract in the desired way. Interfacing
problem solving in school mathematics and the real world requires, among other
things, some effort to recognize the social boundaries of the two activity systems,
and to understand, maintain, and work across them. For this purpose, two constructs
that have been shown to be both relevant and powerful in explaining and interfacing
the interaction of the two activity systems will be used. The two constructs are
boundary crossing and boundary objects.

4.8.1 Boundary Crossing Construct

Educators as well as the public at large are becoming increasingly aware of the
cultural and social separation between the construction and transmission of knowl-
edge in school and the actual way knowledge is used and valued in the schools
temporal, social, and cultural context. Specifically, Sect. 4.5 of this chapter identi-
fied differences between problem solving in school and in the real world, and those
span the object of problem solving, the artifacts used, and the location and commu-
nity in which this activity takes place. These differences are perceived by students
as social boundaries that have to be crossed almost on a daily basis.
The term boundary crossing has developed different shades of meaning depend-
ing on the way in which it is used. Suchman (1994) uses boundary crossing to
denote how professionals at work may need to enter onto territory in which we are
unfamiliar and, to some significant extent therefore unqualified (p. 25). Engestrm,
Engestrm, and Krkkinen (1995), in the context of interconnected activity sys-
tem, refer to boundary crossing as collective concept formation. Akkerman and
Bakker (2011) defined boundary as:
a sociocultural difference leading to discontinuity in action or interaction. Boundaries
simultaneously suggest a sameness and continuity in the sense that within discontinuity two
or more sites are relevant to one another in a particular way (p. 133).

4.8.2 Boundary Crossing in Educational Contexts

The closest idea to boundary crossing in educational contexts is the idea of transfer,
which refers to applying what is learned in one task or context to another task or
context. Akkerman and Bakker (2011) specify two differences between transfer
and boundary crossing. Transfer refers to an individual action involving a one-time
and one-directional transition from a context of learning to one of application
66 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

(e.g., from school to work), whereas boundary crossing refers to an ongoing, two-
directional movement between contexts. A second difference between transfer and
boundary crossing is their perspectives regarding diversity; transfer regards socio-
cultural differences as obstacles that should be overcome or avoided, whereas
boundary crossing, on the other hand, recognizes and values these differences as
resources for learning.
In practice, boundaries occur in educational contexts within the domains of
work, school, and everyday life. The boundary between university teacher educators
and teacher mentors in school is an example of a boundary within the work domain.
The boundary between discourses of students and teachers in the same school is an
example of a boundary within the school domain. The boundary between different
social or cultural groups in a certain community is an example of a boundary within
the everyday domain. The boundary between problem solving in school and in the
real world is an example of a boundary between the school and everyday life.
Interest in boundary crossing has increasingly received attention as a research
framework for studying learning in different sociocultural contexts. In a compre-
hensive meta-analysis of research done on learning using the concepts of boundary
crossing and boundary object, Akkerman and Bakker (2011) report that the number
of such published works has increased from 21 in 1995 to 113 in 2009. Akkerman
and Bakker (2011) identify, among other things, four mechanisms of learning at the
boundary, which they label as identification, coordination, reflection, and transfor-
mation. Of particular interest to the theme of this book is the reflection learning
mechanism. These two authors identify two dialogical processes in the reflective
mechanism: one is perspective making and the other is perspective taking. According
to Boland and Tenkasi (1995) perspective making is a dialogical process that
involves making explicit ones understanding and knowledge of a particular issue.
On the other hand, perspective taking is a dialogical process that involves looking at
oneself through the eyes of other worlds.

4.8.3 Boundary Objects

Boundary object is a term introduced by Star and Griesemer (1989) to refer to

mediating artifacts that may facilitate interaction between two different, but inter-
acting, communities of practice:
Boundary objects are objects that are both plastic enough to adapt to local needs and con-
straints of the several parties employing them, yet robust enough to maintain a common
identity across sites. Like the blackboard, a boundary objects sits in the middle of a group
of actors with divergent viewpoints (Star and Griesemer, 1989, p. 46).

The construct of boundary object has been used extensively in research studies
in a variety of contexts. Because of this, a debate has developed on what constitutes
a boundary object. Star (2010) attempted to elaborate and characterize the construct
of boundary object, as she originally defined it. She states that a boundary object has
three characteristics: Interpretive flexibility, the structure of informatics and work
4.8 Crossing the Boundary Between School Mathematics and Real-World Problem 67

process needs and arrangements, and, finally, the dynamic between ill-structured
and more tailored uses of the objects (p. 601). Interpretive flexibility is the main
feature of boundary object as given thus by Star and Griesemer (1989). The second
feature of a boundary object is its organic infrastructure that has arisen due to
information and work requirements. As for the third feature, because it resides
between different social worlds (or different communities of practice), the boundary
object is ill structured, and is made more specific as the different communities work
through it while cooperating without consensus.
The materiality of a boundary object derives from action, not from its physical
nature. A theory, for example, may be a powerful boundary object (argumentation
may be a boundary object if it acts as an interface between two communities of
practice). On the other hand, a car is not a boundary object, though it is made of
material, but becomes one if used to bus students to racially mixed schools.
The meaning of boundary objects differs between Star and her colleagues, and
third-generation CHAT literature. Initially, Engestrm et al. (1995), in line with
Stars meaning of boundary object, refers to the usefulness of shared mental mod-
els, internalized cognitive artifacts, as a specific type of boundary object. Later, in
third-generation CHAT literature, Engestrm (2001) pictures boundary objects as
the potentially shared or jointly constructed objects of two different, yet interacting,
activity systems. This book defines a boundary object to mean either a mediating
artifact (Star), or a potentially shared mediating artifact, or a potentially shared or
jointly constructed object between two different, yet interacting, activity systems
(Engestrm).

4.8.4 Boundary Crossing Between School Mathematics

and Real-World Problem Solving

Boundary crossing between two different, yet interacting, communities of practice

(activity systems) is a complex process which requires cognitive retooling
(Engestrm et al., 1995). One direction of cognitive retooling which has potential
for breaking overconfidence and reutilization is argumentation and dialogue
between the members of the two different communities of practice.
According to Akkerman and Bakker (2011), four cognitive mechanisms or tools
have been used in boundary crossing research in education: identification, coordina-
tion, reflection, and transformation. The last two are particularly relevant as power-
ful cognitive tools to cross from school mathematics to real-world problem solving:
reflection and transformation. The purpose of reflection is to recognize and under-
stand differences between practices and thus to learn more about ones own and
others practices (for example a student-problem solver at school tries to reflect on
real-world problem solving to learn more about it).
The process of reflection is bi-directional in the sense that it involves making
explicit ones perspective regarding an issue as seen within a community of practice
(perspective making) and simultaneously recognizing the issue from the perspective
68 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

of a different, but interacting, community of practice. An example to illustrate the

process of reflection is taken from Jurdak and Shahin (1999).
Perspective making
An elementary student who would approach the problem what is the cost of 4 kilos of
cucumber if the cost per kilo is 1250 lira? would elicit the response:
1250 4 = 5000
Perspective taking
This is a solution of the same problem given by Ahmed, a young street vendor, in the
context of his work street vending fruits and vegetables.
Ahmeds solution of finding the cost of 4 kilos of cucumbers, 1250 lira/kilo, involved
an application of additive distribution he said: 4 kilos, say in 4000 lira and then 4 of 250
lira makes 1000 lira hence the answer is 5000 lira.As can be seen from the above example,
the direction of calculation proceeded from the more significant to the less significant digit
in a factor. A running sum of the partial products was completed rather than delaying the
addition until all partials had been calculated. Many subjects believed that this helped to
minimize forgetting (p. 162).

Clearly the two perspectives are very different in terms of the mode of represent-
ing ideas (mental or written) and the way operations were carried outsemantic
(i.e., manipulation of quantities) or syntactic (i.e., manipulation of symbols). A stu-
dent coming from a school community of practice followed the expected practice of
school mathematics (written mode and manipulation of symbols, perspective mak-
ing) and would be engaged in perspective taking if the student can understand
Ahmeds perspective (oral representation and manipulation of quantities).
Interestingly Jurdak and Shahin (1999) reported that neither the student nor the
street vender was able to see the others perspective and consequently failed to
engage in a reflective process.
The second relevant cognitive tool to crossing boundaries between school math-
ematics and real-world problem-solving activities is transformation. Transformation
emphasizes the confrontation of the internal contradictions between two communi-
ties of practices. As a result of confrontation, a shared problem space may develop.
Given certain problems, individuals that are able to cross their boundaries engage in
a creative process in which ingredients from different contexts are combined into a
hybrid space that takes the form of new and unfamiliar tools or practices that stand
in between established practices in the two systems.
An example of transformation mechanism is what this book is trying to achieve.
Basically, the objective of this book is to arrive at ways that would transform school
problem-solving practices to more embedded real-world problem solving. As such
I hope to describe the confrontation between school mathematics and real-world
problem-solving practices. As a result I hope to construct a hybrid space in which
problem-solving practices cross the boundaries between school mathematics and
the real world.
An example of a hybrid space between two different, yet interacting, activity
systems is provided by Jurdak (2006) who attempted to explore perspectives of
high school students regarding situated problem solving as a hybrid between school
mathematics and real-world problem solving. Starting from the premise that school
4.9 Boundary Objects Between School Mathematics and Real-World Problem Solving 69

mathematics problem solving and real-world problem solving constitute different

communities of practice, Jurdak (2006) identifies and describes the inner contradic-
tions between the two activity systemsschool mathematics problem solving and
real-world problem solvingand explores the possibility of linking the two com-
munities of practice through a shared space of situated problems to cross the
boundaries between the two. High school students were critical of this hybrid space
because they thought that real-world problem-solving practices were drastically
different from those they would use in situated problem solving in terms of mediat-
ing artifacts, rules, and division of labor. They also reported that situated problem
solving is doable in school mathematics, but is still different from real-world prob-
lem solving in that it is not compatible with school assessment expectations and
does not fit within the school schedule because of the time needed to engage in such
problem solving.

4.9 Boundary Objects Between School Mathematics

and Real-World Problem Solving

As mentioned earlier, the boundary object used in this book will be either a mediat-
ing artifact (Star) or a potentially shared or jointly constructed object (Engestrm)
between two different, yet interacting, activity systems. This section proposes six
boundary objects between school mathematics and real-world problem solving
practices (modeling, narrative discourse, ethnomathematics, critical mathematics,
work context, and STEM context). It first identifies and justifies the object that may
serve as boundary object between school mathematics and real-world problem-
solving practices; next it discusses the extent to which the object meets the charac-
teristics of boundary object as suggested by Star (2010): interpretive flexibility, an
infrastructure that has arisen due to information and work requirements, and a
dynamic between ill-structured and more tailored uses of the object.

4.9.1 Modeling

According to Niss, Blum, and Galbraith (2007), from the perspective of mathemat-
ics, the process of modeling involves (1) a mathematical model which consists of
the extra-mathematical domain of interest (a subset of the real world), (2) a mathe-
matical domain, (3) a mapping of relevant relations from the extra-mathematical to
relations in the mathematical domain, (4) inference making within the mathematical
domain, and (5) translation of the outcomes of these inferences to the extra-
mathematical domain to be interpreted as conclusions there and consequently in
any application of mathematics, a mathematical model is involved, explicitly or
implicitly (p. 4).
70 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

Modeling seems to have the characteristic of interpretive flexibility: In school

mathematics, mathematical modeling is normally a component of the school math-
ematics curriculum with dual objectives of enhancing learning of mathematics and
developing competency in applying mathematics (Niss et al., 2007), whereas, in the
real world, modeling is a frequent practice of applying mathematics in everyday
life, such as in shopping transactions. The instructional and learning environments
that use modeling as a mediating artifact constitutes an infrastructure that arises
from the need to teach and learn real-world problem solving in school mathematics
(see Chap. 5). Modeling in everyday life is an unstructured activity that is done
casually, experientially, and driven by decision on the spot (for example, a transac-
tion). On the other hand modeling in school mathematics is a very structured activ-
ity; the teacher assigns the task and the student is expected to use mathematical
concepts and work the solution in a given time in a certain location. The challenge
for modeling to be a boundary object between school mathematics and real life is to
be able to construct instructional/learning environments that use modeling as a
mediating artifact for generating a dynamic to reconcile the casual and informal
practice of modeling in real life with the mathematical practice of modeling in
school mathematics.

4.9.2 Narrative Discourse

According to Bruner (1996) narrative is one of the two modes of thinking enabling
human beings to make their way in the worldthe other style being the paradig-
matic or the logical/classificatory one that has typically been associated with math-
ematics. For him, narrative is a discourse which derives its meaning from the
recounting of sequences of events which have an implied evaluation of the events
recounted. According to him, narrative thinking tries to contextualize the experi-
ence in time and place, while paradigmatic thinking transcends the particular to
reach abstraction.
Could the narrative mode of thinking be a potential boundary object between
school mathematics and real-world problem-solving practices? Needless to say that
narratives dominate our life outside and inside school, to the point that Bruner
(2004) states that from a constructivist point of view Life in this sense is the
same kind of construction of the human imagination as a narrative is (p. 692).
The application of mathematics outside school is part of our everyday life and
hence is the subject of narratives like any other aspect of life. However, narrative
discourse in school mathematics is far from being the self-telling of narratives
about mathematics. The so-called word problems are examples of narratives in
school mathematics, since they are de-contextualized accounts told by the textbook
about imagined events detached from any temporal, spatial, or cultural context. The
real narratives in school mathematics are the untold stories by students about math-
ematics as being inaccessible, impersonal, and barren. Burton (2007) has suggested
4.9 Boundary Objects Between School Mathematics and Real-World Problem Solving 71

that self-telling narratives by students about their experiences in the mathematics

classroom would encourage students to explore the meaning of mathematics by
personalizing it and placing it in its experiential context, thus creating a landscape
which the learner can navigate.
Obviously, the interpretive flexibility of the narrative discourse is demonstrated
by the almost diametrically opposite meaning and function of narrative discourse as
practiced in school mathematics and in the real life. The challenges for narrative to
be a boundary object between school mathematics and real life practices is the
development of instructional/learning environments that can provide an infrastruc-
ture that uses narrative as a mediating artifact for generating a dynamic to reconcile
the casual and spontaneous practice of narrative discourse in real life with the more
structured practice of narrative discourse in school mathematics (see Chap. 6).

4.9.3 Critical Conception of Mathematics

Ole Skovsmose is generally credited with suggesting and developing the critical
conception of mathematics education, and his ideas were most recently published
in his book An Invitation to Critical Mathematics Education (Skovsmose, 2012).
A central concept in his theory is mathemacy, which is seen not only as a compe-
tence in handling mathematical techniques (p. 81) but can be seen as a way of
reading the world in terms of numbers and figures, and of writing it as being open
to change (p. 84). The concept of mathemacy parallels Freires notion of literacy
(Freire, 1972), which not only refers to reading and writing competencies in the
regular sense of the word, but also in the sense that one could interpret reading
as the actions through which one tries to grasp social, political, cultural, and eco-
nomic features of ones life-world, and one could interpret writing as the active
way of changing this world. Skovsmoses (2011) concept of mathemacy includes
both functional and critical practices. Critical mathematics education practices are
very likely to generate opportunities for students to engage in real-world problem
solving in school mathematics. By its very nature, critical mathematics education
strives for developing praxis, i.e., critical consciousness of the world and action to
change it, and as such its practices have to be embedded and enacted in the real
world.
To what degree is mathemacy a potential boundary object between problem solv-
ing in school mathematics and in the real world? Mathemacy allows for flexibility
of interpretation in school mathematics and the real world since its meaning can
vary from simply using mathematics to develop consciousness of social disparities
to using mathematics as a tool to transform individuals life-worlds, which will lead
to cultural transformation. The challenges for mathemacy to be a boundary object
between school mathematics and real life are to be able to construct instructional/
learning environments that use mathemacy as a mediating artifact for generating a
dynamic to reconcile the functional practice of mathemacy in real life with its criti-
cal practice in school mathematics (see Chap. 7).
72 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

4.9.4 Ethnomathematics

There is an ongoing debate regarding the meanings and interpretations of ethno-

mathematics. DAmbrosio (2001), the originator of ethnomathematics, gave the fol-
lowing definition of ethnomathematics:
I use the word ethno as a form of recognizing the dynamics of different forms of knowl-
edge. There are different ethnomathematicsES (plural), each one responding to a different
cultural, natural, social environment (p. 67).

For our purposes in this chapter, ethnomathematics will be interpreted to refer to

current and historical mathematical practices of cultures and subcultures of any
kind, including ethnic cultures. We shall consider ethnomathematics as a significant
component of the cultural context of the school, and it is viewed as a learning
resource and context in teaching real-world problem solving in school. This means
that ethnomathematics could enrich and illuminate mathematical discourse in the
classroom.
How could ethnomathematics be regarded as a potential boundary object between
problem solving in school mathematics and the real world? First, ethnomathematics
is normally practiced outside the school, and to act as a boundary object between
problem solving in school mathematics and the real world; its practices have to be
appropriated in school mathematics. Thus, ethnomathematics has a lot of interpre-
tive flexibility since students have to make sense of the mathematics implicit in its
everyday practices. The challenges for ethnomathematics to be a boundary object
between school mathematics and real life are to be able to construct instructional/
learning environments that use ethnomathematics as a mediating artifact for gener-
ating a dynamic to reconcile the ill-structured use of ethnomathematics in real life
with its more structured use in school mathematics (see Chap. 8).

4.9.5 Mathematical Practices in the Workplace

Probably the biggest area outside school in which mathematics is practiced is the
work context. According to FitzSimons (2014) work involves the production of
material or intellectual goods or services for humans and their environment, local
to global and beyond, and can be conducted in any physical location as well as virtu-
ally (p. 293). Mathematics that is practiced in the workplace involves mathematical
skills which are oral, local, context-dependent and specific, tacit, multi-layered,
and contradictory across but not within contexts (Bernstein, 2000, p. 157).
Mathematical practices in the workplace may provide a useful boundary object
between problem solving in school mathematics and the real world. A workplace
practice allows for flexibility of interpretation in school mathematics and the real
world since its meaning can vary from a routine, context-bound, and work-related
practice to a formal practice of discovering the mathematical concepts in the work-
place practices. The challenges for mathematical practices to be a boundary object
4.9 Boundary Objects Between School Mathematics and Real-World Problem Solving 73

between school mathematics and real life are to be able to construct instructional/
learning environments that use workplace practices as a mediating artifact for gen-
erating a dynamic to reconcile the workplace practice with the practices of in-school
mathematics (see Chap. 9).

4.9.6 Mathematical Practices in STEM

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education is one type

of curriculum integration whose purpose is to integrate the four subjects in order to
provide opportunities for students to experience learning in real-world situations.
STEM education is a fairly recent development and has been recognized by profes-
sional organizations, such as the National Research Council (NRC), National
Science Foundation (NSF), and National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(NCTM). While the goals for effective STEM instruction have been advocated and
practiced, there is a need to define a theoretical framework for STEM integration
that will serve as a framework to understand curricular and classroom practices.
One promising conceptualization of STEM education is integrative STEM educa-
tion, which includes approaches that explore teaching and learning between/among
any two or more of the STEM subject areas, and/or between a STEM subject and
one or more other school subjects (Sanders, 2008, p. 21). The pedagogy of this
approach combines technologically designed scientific inquiry which is a:
problem-based learning that purposefully situates scientific inquiry and the application of
mathematics in the context of technological designing/problem solving. Inquiry of that sort
rarely occurs in a technology education lab, and technological design rarely occurs in the
science classroom. But in the world outside of schools, design and scientific inquiry are rou-
tinely employed concurrently in the engineering of solutions to real-world problems (p. 21).

Why is STEM integration a potential boundary object between school problem

solving and real-world problem solving? First, we should note that STEM integra-
tion belongs to the school curricular domain and as such is different from the other
boundary objects suggested so far in that it is enacted in the school rather than the
real world outside the school. However, although STEM integration belongs to the
school curriculum, STEM subjects (other than mathematics) may provide more
pathways to real-world problem solving than mathematics alone as well as more
opportunities to experience real-world problem solving from the perspectives of
science, technology, and engineering.
It is not difficult to see that the mathematical practices in the context of STEM are
not essentially different from mathematical practices in mathematics alone, except for
the domain of application. As such STEM mathematical practices qualify as a bound-
ary object that satisfies Stars (2010) criteria. Interpretive flexibility is warranted by
the fact that STEM mathematical practices require only a change of perspective from
mathematics to the other STEM subjects. The challenges for STEM to be a boundary
object between school mathematics and real life are to be able to construct instruc-
tional/learning environments that use STEM disciplines as mediating artifacts for
74 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

generating a dynamic to reconcile STEM practices with the practices of in-school

mathematics (see Chap. 10).
Finally, the six boundary objects suggested for boundary crossing between prob-
lem solving in school and problem solving in the real world (modeling, narrative
discourse, ethnomathematics, critical mathematics education, workplace mathemat-
ical practices, and STEM mathematical practices) do not function in isolation. For
example, modeling is closely related to science mathematical practices; ethnomath-
ematics is related to science and technology; workplace mathematical practices are
related to critical mathematics education; and narrative discourse is closely related
to each and all. The six suggested boundary objects form a web in which every node
may be affected by each of the remaining nodes. The relations are not only at the
structural level, but also at the action level in the sense that the individual may use
any or all of these boundary objects to cross the boundaries between school and the
real-world problem solving.
This chapter presented research and theoretical evidence that points to the fact
that problem-solving practices in the real world and in school mathematics are dif-
ferent to the extent that they constitute two distinct communities of practice. Today
schools and their larger communities have predominantly accepted this separation
between school and real-world problem-solving practices and settled to a tacit
agreement between the two communities to allow each to claim its own territories
and define thick and nonporous boundary between them. On the other hand, theo-
retical and research findings suggest that viewing boundaries as common boundar-
ies, rather than territory borders, provide opportunities for interaction and
cooperation, is an alternative to this separation (apartheid) between the two com-
munities. It is the thesis of this book that students can be empowered to cross those
boundaries using appropriately developed symbolic and material tools as common
spaces for interaction and cooperation. This chapter examined the relevant research
and theoretical findings and identified a set of boundary objects that have the poten-
tial to help students cross the boundaries between problem-solving practices in the
real world and in school mathematics. The construct of an interconnected activity
system formed of problem solving in school and real-world activity systems and the
construct of boundary crossing between the two systems constitute the cornerstones
of the multiple perspective of learning and teaching real-world problem solving in
school mathematics. This framework will be presented in Chaps. 11 and 12.

4.10 My Narrative: How I Was Drawn to Activity Theory

And drawn I was! Up to the mid-1990s, more than 20 years after my Ph.D. at the
University of Wisconsin, Madison, I had absolutely no knowledge or contact with
activity theory. I joined the University of Wisconsin, Madison, in 1971 in the wake of
the massive movement of new math in the USA. It was thus not unusual to be
trained from the point of view that mathematics education is an applied social science
and research in it is predominantly quantitative and addresses issues of mathematics
education in the context of curriculum and instruction. The over-reaching psychology
4.10 My Narrative: How I Was Drawn to Activity Theory 75

in that period was the Bruner of the 1960s, who had laid the psychological foundation
for the new math era. So strong was the influence of mathematics and so weak was
the concern with the social and cultural aspects of mathematics that my dissertation,
which involved a teaching experiment of the effect of structural properties on math-
ematics achievement, did not refer to any social or cultural concern, although the
experiment involved two diametrically socially opposite groups: a Palestinian camp
and an elite private school in Beirut, Lebanon.
Towards the end of the 1980s, I had developed some awareness of the social and
cultural concerns of mathematics education, primarily as a result of the experiences
I had as a mathematics education consultant in different contexts in many Arab
countries. This social and cultural awareness was reflected in two presentations, one
in Budapest ICME, titled Religion and Language as Cultural Carriers and Barriers
in Mathematics Education (Jurdak, 1989), and an invited lecture in Laval ICME,
titled Mathematics in the Global Village, the Wedge and the Filter (Jurdak, 1994).
By the mid-1990s I came to the conclusion that this global critical mathematics is
quite removed from school mathematics education, which was closer to my research
interest and the domain of my work at the university.
At that time, Iman Shahin, a former M.A. student of mine (who now has her own
career as a mathematics educator), expressed an interest in studying the mathemati-
cal practices of young vendors, and was passionate about that and about Laves
theory of cognition-in-practice. This was a happy coincidence for me and Iman. For
me, it opened my eyes to a shift in my research from the global to the local and from
the single-perspective quantitative research to the multiple perspectives of contextu-
alized qualitative research. Although the activity theory was not in the picture, this
research was a prelude to it. In fact, activity theory was not mentioned in the article
we wrote on this research (Jurdak & Shahin, 1999), and we refrained from
interpreting the findings from the perspective of cognition-in-practice framework,
although inspired by it. In hindsight, as mentioned frequently in this book, activity
theory was at the heart of and could have been used as a framework to interpret the
findings of that study. That was an indirect preparation for me to be initiated into
activity theory. After completing her M.A., Iman Shahin worked with me on a sec-
ond research project whose purpose was to study and compare the nature of spatial
reasoning by practitioners (plumbers) in the workplace and students in a school
setting while constructing solids from plane surfaces (Jurdak & Shahin, 2001). It
was here that I came face to face with activity theory as presented in the works of
Leontev and Vygotsky, which I was to discover later was the first generation of
activity theory. In this study, I discovered the power of activity theory to look for,
and explain, the invisible. In this sense activity theory was a tipping point in my
research career and created a new research path for me, which focused on under-
standing the difference between problem-solving practices in school mathematics
and the real world and their pedagogical implications to teaching and learning prob-
lem solving in school mathematics.
The next turning point was my exposure to the second generation of activity
theory. In 2001, while participating in a PME conference in Utrecht, the Netherlands,
I learned about a conference to be organized by the International Society for
Cultural Activity Research (ISCART) in Amsterdam in 2002. I decided to attend
76 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

this conference to learn more about activity theory, though I was not ready to make
any contribution there. This conference was a landmark in my journey with activity
theory. There, I got to listen to some of the pioneers of activity theory. Also I was
pleasantly surprised by the diversity of the participants of that conference. Unlike
the conferences I used to attend like PME and ICME, where the great majority of
participants were mathematics educators, the participants at the ISCART confer-
ence were from diverse backgrounds, such as educators, psychologists, sociolo-
gists, management specialists, computer scientists, and practicing artists. There, I
was introduced to Engestrms activity system and its famous triangular represen-
tation, which impressed me with its semiotic power and simplicity. The activity
system as the second generation of activity theory inspired my study on contrasting
perspectives and performance of high school students on problem solving in real-
world situated contexts and school contexts (Jurdak, 2006).
In 2009 I wrote my book titled Equity in quality in mathematics education
(Jurdak, 2009). In that book I used the activity system consistently as a framework
to study equity and quality in the multilayered system consisting of hierarchical
activity systems at the classroom, school, country, and global levels. In 2007, my
colleague Saouma BouJaoude, a science educator, and I obtained a grant from the
Arab Thought Foundation (ATF) to start a school-based reform project called
TAMAM, an acronym derived from the Arabic title of the project which consists of
the initials of school-based reform in Arabic (al-Tatweer Al-Mustanid ila
Al-Madrasa) and which means perfect in colloquial Arabic (address: http://tama-
mproject.org/). The project aimed to develop a school-based grounded theory of
educational reform in the Arab region that would provide policymakers with
research-based recommendations for implementing educational reform in their
countries. It involved a partnership between the American University of Beirut and
schools from Arab countries. The project included a variety of mediating artifacts
such as conferences, need-based action research school projects, and reflective
practice. From the beginning I could conceive of TAMAM as an activity system but
felt that this framework did not capture the complexity of the project in terms of
accounting for the relationships between the three communities of practice involved
in TAMAM: the university, school, and TAMAM. I had to wait till I was preparing
the literature for this book to discover the third generation of activity theory repre-
sented by two or more networked activity systems acting as one activity system.
This allowed me to redefine my conception of TAMAM as an interconnected activ-
ity system of the three activity systems of the university, school, and TAMAM.

References

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 132169.
Bakker, A., & Akkerman, S. (2014). A boundary-crossing approach to support students integration
of statistical and work-related knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 223237.
References 77

Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: Theory, research, critique. Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Revised edition.
Boland, R. J., Jr., & Tenkasi, R. V. (1995). Perspective making and perspective taking in communi-
ties of knowing. Organization Science, 6(4), 350372.
Bruner, J. S. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (2004). Life as narrative. Social Research, 71(3), 691710.
Burton, L. (2007). Mathematicians narratives about mathematics. In B.V. Kerkhove & J.P. van
Bendegem (Eds.), Perspectives on Mathematical Practices (pp. 155173). The Netherland:
Springer.
DAmbrosio, U. (2001). General remarks on ethnomathematics. ZDM, 33(3), 6769.
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrm, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualiza-
tion. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133156.
Engestrm, Y., Engestrm, R., & Krkkinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing
in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and
Instruction, 5(4), 319336.
Fitzsimons, G. E. (2005). Technology mediated post-compulsory mathematics: An activity theory
approach. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 36(7),
769777.
FitzSimons, G. (2014). Commentary on vocational mathematics education: Where mathematics
education confronts the realities of peoples work. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2),
291305.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Greiffenhagen, C., & Sharrock, W. (2008). School mathematics and its everyday other? Revisiting
Laves Cognition in Practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(1), 121.
Jurdak, M. E. (1989). Religion and language as culture carriers and barriers in mathematics educa-
tion. Science and Technology Education Document Series, 35, 1214.
Jurdak, M. E. (1994). Mathematics education in the global village. In D. Robitaille, D. Wheeler, &
C. Kieran (Eds.), Selected lectures from the 7th International Congress on Mathematical
Education (pp. 199210). Quebec: Laval University.
Jurdak, M. (2006). Contrasting perspectives and performance of high school students on problem
solving in real world, situated, and school contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3),
283301.
Jurdak, M. (2009). Equity in quality in mathematics education. New York, NY: Springer.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (1999). An ethnographic study of the computational strategies of a group
of young street vendors in Beirut. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 155172.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (2001). Problem solving activity in the workplace and the school:
The case of constructing solids. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(3), 297315.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept
of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Masingila, J. O. (1994). Mathematics practice in carpet laying. Anthropology & Education
Quarterly, 25(4), 430462.
Niss, M., Blum, W., & Galbraith, P. (2007). Part 1 Introduction. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn,
& M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study
(pp. 333). Boston, MA: Springer.
Norton, S., McRobbie, C., & Ginns, I. (2007). Problem solving in a middle school robotics design
classroom. Research in Science Education, 37(3), 261277.
Noss, R., Pozzi, S., & Hoyles, C. (1999). Touching epistemologies: Meanings of average and
variation in nursing practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(1), 2551.
Nussbaumer, D. (2012). An overview of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) use in class-
room research 2000 to 2009. Educational Review, 64(1), 3755.
78 4 Activity Theory as a Foundation of Real-World Problem Solving in School

Prins, G. T., Bulte, A. M., van Driel, J. H., & Pilot, A. (2008). Selection of authentic modelling
practices as contexts for chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education,
30(14), 18671890.
Roth, W. M. (2014). Rules of bending, bending the rules: The geometry of electrical conduit bend-
ing in college and workplace. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 177192.
Roth, W., Leeb, Y., & Hsu, P. (2009). A tool for changing the world: Possibilities of cultural-historical
activity theory to reinvigorate science education. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 131167.
Roth, W., Radford, L., & LaCroix, L. (2012). Working with cultural-historical activity theory.
Forum Qualitative Social Research, 13(2), 120.
Roth, W., Tobin, K., Elmesky, R., Carambo, C., Mcknight, Y., & Beers, J. (2004). Re/Making
identities in the praxis of urban schooling: A cultural historical perspective. Mind Culture &
Activity, 11(1), 4869.
Sanders, M. (2008). STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. Technology Teacher, 68(4), 2026.
Skovsmose, O. (2012). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science,
Technology & Human Values, 35(5), 601617.
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects:
Amateurs and professionals in Berkeleys museum of vertebrate zoology, 190739. Social
Studies of Science, 19(3), 387420. Sage Publications Ltd.
Stone, L. D., & Gutirrez, K. D. (2007). Problem articulation and the processes of assistance: An
activity theoretic view of mediation in game play. International Journal of Educational
Research, 46(1), 4356.
Suchman, L. (1994). Working relations of technology production and use. Computer Supported
Cooperative Work, 2, 2139.
von Brevern, H., & Synytsya, K. (2005). Systemic-structural theory of activity: A model for holis-
tic learning technology systems. Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning
Technologies, pp. 745749.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007). Black boxes in workplace mathematics. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 64(3), 317343.
Williams, J. S., Wake, G. D., & Boreham, N. C. (2001). School or college mathematics and work-
place practice: An activity theory perspective. Research in Mathematics Education, 3(1), 6983.
Zinchenko, V. P., & Gordon, V. M. (1981). Methodological problems in analyzing activity. In J. V.
Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: M. E.
Sharpe.
Chapter 5
Real-World Problem Solving
from the Perspective of Modeling

Objects, relations, phenomena, assumptions, questions, etc. in

[the extra-mathematical domain] D are identified and selected
as relevant for the purpose and situation and are then
mapped - translated - into objects, relations, phenomena,
assumptions, questions, etc. pertaining to [the mathematical
domain]M. Within M, mathematical deliberations,
manipulations and inferences are made, the outcomes of which
are then translated back to D and interpreted as conclusions
concerning that domain.
(Niss, Blum, & Galbraith, 2007, p. 4).
models edit, rather than copy, the world. Models amplify
phenomena by specifying relationships that one might not have
otherwise considered, so models suggest qualities of the world
to modelers. One must learn to look through the model into the
world
(Lehrer & Schauble, 2007, p.159).

5.1 Perspectives on Modeling

All definitions of modeling involve interaction between the triads of human subject,
mathematics, and the real world (Fig. 5.1). However, different perspectives on mod-
eling result from focusing more on some of these interactions than others. The con-
text of modeling and the role of the human subject in it are two factors that play a
role in classifying perspectives on modeling.
Kaiser and Sriraman (2006) surveyed international perspectives on modeling in
mathematics education and classified them, basically according to the goals of the
modeling, into six typical perspectives:
Pragmatic perspective focuses on pragmatic goals, namely the ability of learners
to apply mathematics to solve practical problems (Henry Pollak is credited with
initiating this perspective).
Scientific-humanistic perspective views mathematics as the scientific and human-
istic ideals of education. Its goal is to enable learners to create relations between
mathematics and reality. The early Hans Freudenthals book Mathematics as

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 79

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_5
80 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

Fig. 5.1 Modeling as Real world

interaction among the triad
human subject,
mathematics, and the real
world

Human subject Mathematics

an Education Task provides an example of this approach (later Freudenthal

changed his position and adopted the pragmatic perspective).
Epistemological perspective emphasizes the development of mathematical the-
ory as an integral part of the processes of mathematizing, and is related to the
scientific-humanistic perspective. Hans-Georg Steiners work is representative
of this perspective.
Emancipatory perspective focuses on the socio-critical role of the individual, as
a member of a specific social-cultural context, in the modeling process.
Integrative perspective suggests integrating and orchestrating the goals of model-
ing to serve scientific, mathematical, and pragmatic purposes (Blum & Niss, 1991).
There is a need to expand the perspectives identified in Kaiser and Sriraman
(2006) for two considerations. First, the publication of the 14th ICMI study on
Modeling and applications in mathematics education (Blum, Galbraith, Henn, &
Niss, 2007) elaborated new perspectives, and second, there is need for broader theo-
retical classification of the current perspectives including those that were elaborated
in the 14th ICMI study. For this purpose, I suggest viewing the modeling process as
a practice, i.e., the process by which modeling is actually enacted and classifying
modeling practices in three categories: modeling as a mathematical practice, model-
ing as sociocultural practice, and modeling as an epistemic practice. The basis for
this classification is that these three categories posit fundamentally different assump-
tions regarding relationships among the human subject (the modeler), the real world,
and mathematics.

5.2 Modeling as a Mathematical Practice

Perhaps the 14th ICMI study on Modeling and applications in mathematics educa-
tion (Blum et al., 2007) represents a synthesis of the different perspectives of mod-
eling. To demonstrate the features of modeling as a mathematical practice, the
definitions of a model and modeling cycle as they appeared in 14th ICMI study are
presented below. Niss et al. (2007) defined a mathematical model as follows:
A mathematical model consists of the extra-mathematical domain, D, of interest, some
mathematical domain M, and a mapping from the extra-mathematical to the mathematical
domain. (p. 4)
5.4 Modeling as a Sociocultural Practice 81

They also defined a modeling cycle as follows:

Objects, relations, phenomena, assumptions, questions, etc. in D are identified and selected
as relevant for the purpose and situation and are then mappedtranslatedinto objects,
relations, phenomena, assumptions, questions, etc. pertaining to M. Within M, mathemati-
cal deliberations, manipulations and inferences are made, the outcomes of which are then
translated back to D and interpreted as conclusions concerning that domain. (p. 4).

Modeling as a mathematical practice makes a number of assumptions regarding

the relationships among the human subject, the real world, and mathematics. It
assumes that the world of mathematics and the real world are separate worlds and
that the real world has to be mapped into the world of mathematics. The agency of
the human subject who does the mapping between the two worlds is mostly viewed
as neutral in the sense that the subjectivity of the human agent does not play a role
in the practice of modeling. With the exception of the emancipatory perspective, all
other perspectives identified by Kaiser and Sriraman (2006) fall within the category
of modeling as a mathematical practice.

5.3 Modeling as an Epistemic Practice

The epistemic practice views modeling as the transformation of an agent from one
state of experience to a more complex one, and thus it transforms the individual way
of looking at ones world. The changes that take place as a result of modeling are
epistemic in the sense that these changes involve ways by which agents look at their
own world. Thus the real world and mathematics are integrated in the consciousness
of the human agent. Confrey and Maloney (2007) do not consider modeling as a
mapping of a particular version of reality but rather as a process of encountering an
indeterminate situation, problematizing it, and bringing inquiry, reasoning, and
mathematical structures to bear to transform the situation (p.60) into a new repre-
sentation of said situation. This modeling changes the persons experience and
hence the way by which the person looks at his/her world.
The epistemic practice differs from the mathematical practice in that it gives a
central active role to the agency of the human subject in developing knowledge and
experience from the current to a more sophisticated state. It also aims at making the
modeling process a vehicle for changing the epistemological perspective of the
human agent.

5.4 Modeling as a Sociocultural Practice

From the perspective of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), modeling as

practice is regarded as a purposeful human activity which involves human subjects
as they engage in actions, using a variety of mediating artifacts, one of which is
modeling, to achieve a desired object with a concrete outcome. In enacting the prac-
tice of modeling, human beings use available mediating artifacts which have cul-
tural meaning in the community in which the activity is being enacted.
82 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

The differences between modeling as a mathematical, an epistemic, and as a

sociocultural practice are numerous and deep. First, modeling as a mathematical
practice focuses on the interaction between mathematics and the objective real
world, whereas modeling as epistemic or sociocultural practices focuses on the
interaction among a human subject, the real world, and mathematics. Second, mod-
eling as a mathematical practice focuses on mathematical processes, whereas mod-
eling as an epistemic practice emphasizes cognitive processes, while modeling as a
sociocultural practice emphasizes the actions involved in enacting the processes of
modeling. Third, the mediating artifacts involved in modeling as mathematical or
epistemic practices are mathematical processes and tools which are context free,
whereas modeling as a sociocultural practice involves artifacts that are culture spe-
cific and are not limited to mathematical tools. Fourth, the outcome of modeling as
a mathematical practice is a solution written in mathematical language, whereas the
outcome of modeling as epistemic practice is a cognitive model which changes the
epistemological perspective of the modeler. On the other hand, the outcome of mod-
eling as a sociocultural practice is the actual construction of an outcome.

5.5 Contrasting Modeling Practices in Real-World Problem

Solving and in School Mathematics Problem Solving

Problem solving, whether in school mathematics or in the real world, is a broader

concept than modeling. In addition to modeling, school mathematics includes solving
problems in the context of mathematics, such as dealing with proofs, constructions,
and computational problems. In fact, modeling problems in school mathematics rep-
resent a minority. On the other hand, not all problem solving in the real world requires
the exclusive use of modeling. Real-world problem solving may involve the use of
mediating artifacts, other than mathematics, such as guessing, consulting an author-
ity, or using technology. However, there is a consensus that modeling is an indispens-
able tool in real-world problem solving. Niss et al. (2007) state that in any application
[in the real world] of mathematics, a mathematical model is involved, explicitly or
implicitly (p. 4) and the generic purpose of building and making use of a model is
to understand or tackle problems in some segment of the real world (p. 9).
Word problems have historically been the claimed context for using modeling
practices in elementary and lower secondary school mathematics. In the way mod-
eling is currently defined, the role of word problems in engaging students in model-
ing practices is almost universally challenged, and even dismissed, by researchers,
teachers, and students. Word problems, as conventionally practiced, are seen as
proxies for translating language sentences to mathematical statements, and as vehi-
cles for practicing the solution of equations. In the words of Niss et al. (2007):
Word problems are nothing more than a dressing up of a purely mathematical problem in
words referring to a segment of the real world. In this case mathematising means merely
undressing the problem, and the solving process then only consists of this undressing, the
use of mathematics, and a straightforward interpretation (pp. 1112).
5.5 Contrasting Modeling Practices in Real-World Problem Solving and in School 83

From the perspective of students, Greer et al. reported that there are many
examples of responses by children to word problems that show an apparent
willingness to ignore things that they know about the world, language, and logic
(p.90)a phenomenon the researchers call suspension of common sense.
Standard applications, such as maximum and minimum problems, in upper
secondary school are the counterparts of word problems in elementary school.
They are proxies for exercising calculus and can be solved without regard to the
nature of the given real-world context. Authentic modeling problem solving is
rarely practiced in curricula except for those that are structured specifically to
target modeling problems.
If we accept the statement made by Niss et al. (2007) to the effect that a mathe-
matical model is involved, explicitly or implicitly, in any application of mathemat-
ics in the real world, we can see the degree to which modeling practices are part of
human activities in contexts such as the workplace, shopping, and possibly indi-
vidual private life. Research has studied modeling practices in the context of prob-
lem solving in the real world in activities in contexts such as the indigenous
workplace (for example, Jurdak & Shahin, 1999, 2001), automated workplace
(for example, Williams, Wake, & Boreham, 2001), and shopping (for example,
Lave, Murtaugh, & de la Rocha, 1984). All those studies reported differences
between modeling practices in the context of problem solving between school
mathematics and the real world.
I shall demonstrate the differences between modeling as mathematical practice
in school mathematics problem solving and as a sociocultural practice in real-
world problem solving by using an example from Jurdak and Shahin (2001). In
this study, the same task was given to a plumber, who owns a workshop and has
extensive experience in constructing cylinders of specified dimensions, and to stu-
dents in their final year of secondary education in the scientific stream. Both
plumber and students were asked, using the appropriate language with each group,
to construct a cylindrical container with a bottom, of 1 L capacity and a height of
20 cm. This task was a breakdown in the typical behaviors of the students and the
plumber. Though the students had experience in solving problems involving the
volume of a cylinder, they did not have experience in actually constructing cylin-
ders with given specifications; on the other hand, the plumber had extensive expe-
rience in constructing cylindrical containers of standard dimensions, but he did not
have experience in constructing cylinders that did not have the standard dimen-
sions he worked with. Figure 5.2 presents the actions that were enacted by the
plumber and students as they were engaged in the task (Jurdak & Shahin, 2001).
The students perspective was judged to fit the perspective of modeling as mathe-
matical practice, while the plumbers perspective was judged to fit the perspective
of modeling as life practice.
In order to compare and contrast the two modeling perspectives, we used the
plumbers and students actions to reconstruct the steps they followed in the model-
ing process. The mathematical modeling practice of students focused on the interac-
tion between the real world, represented by the written presentation of the task, and
their mathematical knowledge. The description of the task prompted them to recall
a mathematical formula they knew and had used.
84 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

Plumber Students

The real world situation

After making many visits to the plumbers workshop
in order to understand his practice, the task was
presented orally to the plumber using language that
he could understand.
The task was presented to students in school
mathematics language and they were given papers,
scissors, rulers, and calculators. They performed the
task in a classroom in the presence of a researcher
and they were free to discuss among each other and
to ask questions of the researcher

Constructing the mathematical model

Students quickly recalled the volume

The plumber displayed three mathematical ideas:
formula for a cylinder (V= r2h)
Perceiving the 3-dimensional cylindrical
They re-formulated the problem as
container as a 2-dimensional sheet
calculating r, given h (20 cm) and V (one
Recognizing the perimeter of the base as the
liter)
width of the rectangular sheet and the height as
its length
Making an assumption that if the volume is to
remain one liter, then the sheet should have a
constant area. Hence if the height is to be
increased, then the width has to be decreased
Working within the mathematical model

The plumber was unable to use his mathematical Students used the mathematical model (V=
observations except in attempting to estimate the r2h) to calculate r.
width of the required sheet by trial and error to They stopped there and did not
construct different cylinders, using his tools proceed to construct the cylinder

Validation and evaluation of the model

Using water, the plumber compared the
capacity of the cylinders he constructed by
trial and error to the capacity of the model
cylinder he already knew
Students did not feel the need to validate the
outcome of their calculation
Students had difficulty in using the value of
r to do the actual construction of the
cylinder t

Fig. 5.2 Actions enacted by the plumber and students (Jurdak & Shahin, 2001)

On the other hand the plumber showed a sense of agency by reflecting on the task
and its meaning in his own context and on ways of dealing with it. The students
seemed to be engaged in habitual internalized processes, whereas the plumber was
engaged in external actions. The mediating artifacts and knowledge of the students
and plumber were context specific and resulted in two fundamentally different mod-
eling processes and outcomes.
In summary, the factors that may account for the differences between modeling
as mathematical practice in school mathematics problem solving and as a sociocul-
tural practice in real-world problem fall under three broad themes: role of the com-
munity, the agency of the human subject, and the visibility of mathematics.
5.5 Contrasting Modeling Practices in Real-World Problem Solving and in School 85

5.5.1 Role of the Community of Practice

The community of practice in which the modeling takes place has a salient impact
on the way the problem solver perceives each of the four steps of modeling.
According to Brousseau (1984), the didactical contract in the community of prac-
tice of schools helps shape the students strategies and beliefs, perceptions, and
interpretations. The socio-mathematical norms shape students behaviors in the
mathematics class, i.e., how to use and communicate mathematics. In the real-world
community of practice, the sociocultural norms in the immediate and broader com-
munity impact problem solvers social expectations, behaviors, and practices.
The object of the problem is viewed differently according to the expectations and
practices of the community. In the example we provided, the student viewed the
problem as a school task of finding a solution to a mathematical problem, whereas
the plumber viewed the problem as constructing an actual object. The use of mediat-
ing artifacts in the modeling cycle is shaped, to a large extent, by those artifacts that
are in use in the community of practice. For example, the artifacts used by the stu-
dents to construct a model were mostly mathematical formulas and procedures,
while the plumber used the artifacts of the work tools and mathematical ideas that
are embedded in his habitual environment. The students ignored the validation of
the model probably because of their unshakable belief in mathematics, while the
plumber used his habitual practices to validate the model.

5.5.2 Agency of the Human Subject

Agency refers to the capacity of individuals (agents) to act independently and to make
their own free choices. The rules, norms, and expectations of the school context nor-
mally constrain the agency of students in enacting modeling practices more than those
of the larger community of the real world. Students are expected to follow the rules
and norms of the school in all four stages of the modeling cycle, i.e., while conceptual-
izing the situation, constructing the model, working within the model, and validating
the model. On the other hand, in the real world, the plumber has the capacity to choose
and redefine the problem in order to make it more meaningful; to choose the time and
place to engage in the problem; and to choose extra-mathematical tools and artifacts.

5.5.3 The Visibility of Mathematics

According to Latour (1999), black-boxing refers to a process in which scientific

and technical work is made invisible by its own success. When a machine runs effi-
ciently, when a matter of fact is settled, one need focus only on its inputs and out-
puts and not on its internal complexity (p. 304). In a series of studies, Williams and
Wake (2007) have reported that mathematical processes in the workplace are crys-
tallized in black boxes shaped by the workplace cultures that disguise or hide
86 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

mathematics. It seems that black-boxing does not occur only in the workplace but
also in everyday practices. One has only to observe what happens in a supermarket
to see how machines black-box the intricate mathematics involved in selling and
buying. It seems that the modeling practices in the real world depend a lot on black-
boxing of mathematics (i.e., focusing only on inputs and outputs of a machine and
ignoring the mathematical processes that take place internally), whereas in the
school context, however, making the mathematical processes explicit is regarded as
a highly valued pedagogical practice.

5.6 Modeling as an Interface Between Problem Solving

in School Mathematics and in the Real World

In Chap. 4, it was argued that modeling is a powerful boundary object that can be
structured to enable students to cross the boundary between real-world and school
mathematics problem solving. In this section we explore possible instructional
designs which serve as modeling mediating artifacts to cross the boundary between
real-world and school mathematics problem solving.

5.6.1 Recontextualizing Word Problems as Modeling Activities

Word problems have historically been claimed as a context for using modeling prac-
tices in elementary and lower secondary school mathematics. While teachers per-
ceive word problems as a context for practicing operations and equations, some
researchers suggest that word problems may be recontextualized to be modeling
practices that may help students to cross the boundary between problem solving in
school mathematics and the real world. Two proposals have been suggested to make
word problems a common space between problem solving in school mathematics
and in the real world. One proposal was suggested by Greer, Verschaffel, and
Mukhopadhyay (2007) to reconceptualize word problems as exercises in modeling
and another by Bonotto (2007), which involves replacing word problems with activ-
ities of realistic mathematical modeling.
Greer et al. (2007) recommend a modeling perspective in word problems,
whereby arithmetic operations are regarded as candidate models for a given situa-
tion presented verbally or otherwise. They argue for replacing routine practice
implicit modeling in word problem solving to explicit modeling, which requires
more adaptive practices. Their approach includes:
The use of more realistic and challenging tasks than traditional textbook problems
A variety of teaching methods and learner activities, including expert modeling
of the strategic aspects of the modeling process, small-group work, and whole-
class discussions
The creation of a classroom climate conducive to the development of the elabo-
rated view of mathematical modeling and of the accompanying beliefs (p. 93)
5.6 Modeling as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics 87

Based on increasing evidence of the effectiveness of out-of-school learning,

Bonotto (2007) suggested that, while there may be some inherent differences
between school and out-of-school contexts, these can be reduced by creating class-
room situations that promote learning processes closer to those arising from out-of-
school mathematics practices. Bonotto suggests the replacement of word problems
by the extensive use of suitable cultural artifacts and interactive teaching methods to
create tension between school mathematics and the real world in order to engage
students in realistic mathematical modeling in problem solving.
In other words, beside mathematising everyday experience, it is necessary to be every-
daying mathematics. This can be implemented in a classroom by encouraging students to
analyze mathematical facts embedded in appropriate cultural artifacts
(Bonotto, 2007, p. 18788).

Cultural artifacts refer to objects such as supermarket bills, bottle and can labels,
and railway schedules. This approach offers the opportunity of making connections
between the mathematics incorporated in real-life situations and school mathemat-
ics. Such an approach is likely to change students conceptions about and attitudes
towards mathematics, and also to modify classroom culture by establishing new
classroom socio-mathematical norms.

5.6.2 Interpreting Outputs of Black-Boxed Modeling

According to Strsser (2007), modeling and the application of mathematics are grad-
ually disappearing from societal perception by being black-boxed, i.e., hidden in
sophisticated instruments. General education will neither be able to study all the
mathematical concepts used in the instruments available nor can it offer an analysis
aiming at a deep and complete understanding of all black boxes using mathematics
(p. 176). However, the output of such machines is part of modern life. Examples of
outputs that are mathematically rich are bank statements, financial charts, and charts
that describe developmental phenomena. Because of their explicit mathematics,
these mathematical artifacts can be the context of meaningful problem solving. Thus,
these technologically produced mathematical artifacts may serve as a good candidate
for a boundary object between problem solving in school and in the real world.

5.6.3 Emergent Modeling

Emergent modeling has its roots in the epistemological theory of modeling.

According to Gravemeijer (2007), emergent modeling is an instructional design
heuristic within the domain-specific instruction theory for realistic mathematics
education (RME), in which students develop their initial informal, situated model
into a more sophisticated model. These emergent models are seen as originating
from students activity in and reasoning about situations. The process of construct-
ing models is one of progressively reorganizing situations. The model and the
88 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

situation being modeled co-evolve and are mutually constituted in the course of
modeling activity (Gravemeijer, 2007, p. 138). According to this design heuristic,
the initial model acts as a model of the students situated informal strategies. Then,
over time, the model becomes an entity as to serve as a model for more formal, yet
personally meaningful, mathematical reasoning.
Two observations are in order here. First, emergent modeling is not necessarily a
problem-solving activity since its goal as an instructional heuristic is to help stu-
dents develop the initial model of the situation, which will later become a model for
meaningful learning. Second, emergent modeling does not necessarily deal with
real-world problems unless the situation itself represents or simulates a real-world
situation. However, emergent modeling, when practiced using problematized simu-
lated real-world problems, has the power to connect with the real world in two
directions: first, it makes the experiential knowledge of students, acquired in the real
world, the starting point of the process; second, it prepares and encourages students
to use the process itself in real-world problem solving. Therefore, emergent model-
ing can be structured to serve as a modeling artifact to help students cross the
boundary between problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world,
since it provides a common space where students can learn real-world problem
solving in school mathematics.

5.6.4 Model-Eliciting Activities

The Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA) approach to modeling is an instructional

design heuristic which has its roots in the epistemological theory of modeling.
According to Lesh and Yoon (2007) MEA are:
problem solving activities that elicit a model. That is, their solutions require students to
express their current ways of thinking (i.e., their relevant models) in forms that are tested
and refined multiple times. So, final solutions involve not only model development but also
the development of constructs and conceptual systems that the models embody.
(p. 163).

According to Lesh and Yoon (2007), the principles for designing MEA include
engaging students in problem-solving activities in which they recognize the need to
reconsider their current ways of thinking about the situation; challenging students
to explicitly express their current understanding; engaging them in progressively
testing and revising their understanding; and enabling students to develop models
that serve as sharable and reusable conceptual tools.
Although it has its roots in the epistemological theory of modeling, the MEA
approach has its own unique characteristics. Some of these characteristics render
MEA a strong candidate to be a modeling instructional design that can be used effec-
tively to cross the boundary between problem solving in school mathematics and in
the real world. First, it explicitly links modeling to problem solving since it makes
the latter the starting point of the modeling process. Second, since the abilities that
are critical for success in MEA are similar to those that are valued in such fields as
5.7 My Story with Modeling 89

engineering or business management, the MEA approach tends to motivate students

to engage in problem-solving activities that may increase their chances of competing
for sought-after jobs in the real world. Third, since the situation in the MEA approach
often (but not always) exists outside the world of mathematics, it may act as a tool
for linking problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world.

5.7 My Story with Modeling

My first experience with modeling came when my father, a stone mason, asked me,
an eighth grader then, a question regarding an arch for a church he was building.
The question was about the angle of inclination of the first stone in the arch, given
the length of the base and the height of the arch. Intuitively, I modeled the arch as a
circular arc of a circle whose chord has given length and height. I struggled to inter-
pret what the required angle of inclination needed to be. Since we had not yet stud-
ied the circle and its properties, I resorted to what I knew, i.e., the angle between the
base and the chord joining the top of the arch and the end point of the base. The
Pythagoras theorem that we had studied was of no help, so I resorted to my math
teacher and he introduced me to the table of trigonometric values of angles (that was
how they were taught at that time). Although the calculation of the angle was of no
use to my father, it was a kind of revelation for me which has helped me till now
understand the concept of looking to the world through the model (Lehrer &
Schauble, 2007), and the concept of reusable models (Lesh & Yoon, 2007). As we
learned about the circle and tangents in grade 9, I was able to solve the problem by
finding the correct angle (angle between tangent to the arc at its end point, but
unfortunately it was too late because the church had been built and was function-
ing!). This started me thinking that if we want to follow this line of mathematical
thinking, we would have to repeat the process for every stonean approach hardly
useful or applicable. I am sure that my father used his intuitive practical expertise
that he had learned through apprenticeship to build the arch. Later in my life, as I
was exposed to historical edifices (such as Alhambra Palace arabesque decoration),
I started to realize the importance of the magnificent conventional intuitive practical
expertise that was passed through apprenticeship from a generation of almost math-
ematically illiterate artisans to another. It is amazing how those mathematically
illiterate artisans were able to construct such mathematically rich structures and
artifacts in the course of practicing their everyday occupations (for example, the
plane crystallographic groups in Alhambra arabesques, as illustrated in a video by
Costa & Gmez, 1999). There is more than one beautiful mind; one of them is that
collective mind of the craftsmanship of artisans.
My second encounter with modeling occurred when my colleague and I orga-
nized a joint workshop for science and mathematics teachers to introduce them to
the then new computer-mediated technology, which consists of probes to collect
physical data (such as temperature, humidity, distance, force) in real time and a
computer connected to the sensor that digitizes, stores, and displays the data in
90 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

graphical or tabular form and allows the user to choose the best fit mathematical
model of the data. During the workshop, we were intrigued by the nature of the
discourse and the mathematization processes that were taking place. We then
decided to design and implement a teaching experiment to investigate the nature of
discourse and of mathematization in a physics lab, where both the mathematics and
science teachers undertook the instruction. The study was conducted in two grade
11 classes, in which one class used the computer-mediated lab and another tradi-
tional verification-type lab. Among other things, the study concluded that the
computer-mediated lab provides real-world situations that are amenable to mathe-
matization and that promote model identification and assessment but not model
construction (BouJaoude & Jurdak, 2010). It is in this experiment that I observed
firsthand the black-box phenomenon, where the technology actually constructed
the mathematical models that could fit the data derived from the physical model.
The role of the student was limited to choosing the best fit model. This experience
uncovered the complexity of using modeling even in physics and the power and
limitations of technology in that regard.
After the experience with modeling in the physics lab, I decided to introduce a
modeling project in one of my methods courses for secondary mathematics stu-
dent teachers, which involved determining the electoral zones for Lebanon, which
is, even today, a complex, sensitive, and chronic problem because of the nature and
structure of the political system of the country. The population of Lebanon is com-
posed of minorities of religious sects which, by the constitution, have to have pro-
portional representation in the parliament. The issue I required students to deal with
was to use the impartiality of mathematics to define the boundaries of the electoral
zones in a fair way. (Details of the project are described in Chap. 12.)
My last encounter with modeling was unique and unforgettable. Sir Michael
Atiyah, one of the leading living mathematicians in the world, is my wifes cousin.
Up to a few years ago, he used to visit Beirut to promote the Center for Advanced
Mathematical Sciences (CAMS) (at the American University of Beirut) whose
establishment he spearheaded, and/or to give lectures at CAMS. During these visits
he was keen on spending a day or two with us as a family. On one of those visits, he
was to give a lecture on his work related to crystals. One afternoon before the lec-
ture, sitting with him on the balcony of my mountain apartment I asked him about
his lecture and he tried to explain the idea in simple terms. Suddenly, he asked if I
had noticed the hexagons and pentagons on the cover of the football and asked how
and why they existed on almost all footballs. When he discovered that I did not have
the slightest idea, he, as a superb educator, gave me an example of a simpler case: a
regular tetrahedron. If you chop every vertex, then we shall have a hexagon on each
of the four sides, and a triangle for each vertex. It was very clear that this can be done
with any polyhedron under certain conditions. The beauty of it is that this is not a
decorative feat but rather a necessary way to construct the cover of the football. That
was quite a revelation for me, and later when I googled this, I found out that this was
a legitimate topological problem and the soccer ball which has 20 hexagons and 12
pentagons is one of many possibilities (Kotschick, 2006). This experience opened
my eyes to the little tapped source of modeling real-world ordinary objects that have
References 91

some visible mathematical aspects which are part of their being; however, a mathe-
matical investigation would be needed to find the mathematical models embedded in
them. One example that I found interesting for students to analyze is the shades that
beams of light make on surfaces. Patterns in the ordinary world, in nature as well as
in art, that have mathematical models embedded in them are not difficult to find.

References

Blum, W., Galbraith, P. L., Henn, H., & Niss, M. (2007). Modeling and applications in mathemat-
ics education: The 14th ICMI study. Boston, MA: Springer.
Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modeling, applications, and
links to other subjects. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 3768.
Bonotto, C. (2007). How to replace word problems with activities of realistic mathematical model-
ing. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in math-
ematics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 185192). Boston, MA: Springer.
BouJaoude, S. B., & Jurdak, M. E. (2010). Integrating physics and math through microcomputer-
based laboratories (MBL): Effects on discourse type, quality, and mathematization.
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 10191047.
Brousseau, G. (1984). The crucial role of the didactical contract in the analysis and construction of
situations in teaching and learning mathematics. In H. G. Steiner (Ed.), Theory of mathematics
education (pp.110119). (Occasional paper 54). Bielefeld: IDM.
Confrey, J., & Maloney, A. (2007). A theory of mathematical modeling in technological settings.
In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathemat-
ics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 5768). Boston, MA: Springer.
Costa, A. F., & Gmez, B. (1999). Arabesques and geometry-Springer VideoMATH. New York:
Springer.
Gravemeijer, K. (2007). Emergent modeling as a precursor to mathematical modeling. In
W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathematics
education (pp. 137144). Boston, MA: Springer.
Greer, B., Verschaffel, L., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (2007). Modeling for life: Mathematics and chil-
drens experience. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applica-
tions in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 8998). Boston, MA: Springer.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (1999). An ethnographic study of the computational strategies of a group
of young street vendors in Beirut. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 155172.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (2001). Problem solving activity in the workplace and the school: The
case of constructing solids. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(3), 297315.
Kaiser, G., & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modeling in
mathematics education. ZDM, 38(3), 302310.
Kotschick, D. (2006). The topology and combinatorics of soccer balls. American Scientist, 94(4), 350.
Latour, B. (1999). Pandoras hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Boston: Harvard
University Press.
Lave, J., Murtaugh, M., & de la Rocha, O. (1984). The dialectic of arithmetic in grocery shopping.
In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context
(pp. 6794). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2007). A developmental approach for supporting the epistemology of
modeling. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in
mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study (pp. 185192). Boston, MA: Springer.
Lesh, R., & Yoon, C. (2007). What is distinctive in (our views about) models & modeling perspec-
tives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching? In W. Blum, P. Galbraith,
H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th
ICMI study (pp. 185192). Boston, MA: Springer.
92 5 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Modeling

Niss, M., Blum, W., & Galbraith, P. (2007). Part 1 Introduction. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. Henn,
& M. Niss (Eds.), Modeling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study
(pp. 333). Boston, MA: Springer.
Strsser, R. (2007). Everyday instruments: On the use of mathematics (pp. 171178). Boston, MA:
Springer.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007). Black boxes in workplace mathematics. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 64(3), 317343.
Williams, J. S., Wake, G. D., & Boreham, N. C. (2001). School or college mathematics and work-
place practice: An activity theory perspective. Research in Mathematics Education, 3(1), 6983.
Chapter 6
Real-World Problem Solving
from the Perspective of the Narrative
Mode of Thought

The imaginative application of the paradigmatic mode leads to

good theory, tight analysis, logical proof, or empirical
discovery, guided by reasoned hypothesis. The imaginative
application of the narrative mode leads instead to good stories,
gripping drama, believable (though not necessarily true)
historical accounts.
(Brunner, 1986, p. 13)

6.1 Bruners Narrative Mode of Thought

One of Bruners most powerful contributions has been his consideration of narrative
as a mode of reasoning, as a crucial communal tool for ongoing sense-makinga
vehicle for creating self-identity and an organizing tool of a culture. In his book
Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Brunner (1986)) introduces the two modes of
thought, narrative and paradigmatic, which he considers as two distinctive modes of
cognitive functioning that are irreducible to each other. The paradigmatic mode of
thought veries by eventual appeal to procedures for establishing form and empiri-
cal proof (p. 11) and the narrative mode of thought establishes not truth but veri-
similitude (p. 11). These two modes of thought are complementary in the sense
that many scientic and mathematical hypotheses start as stories based on personal
experience, whereas many scientic ideas lead to different forms of art. The two
modes of thought, according to Bruner, are different ways of world-making:
The imaginative application of the paradigmatic mode leads to good theory, tight analysis,
logical proof, or empirical discovery, guided by reasoned hypothesis. The imaginative
application of the narrative mode leads instead to good stories, gripping drama, believable
(though not necessarily true) historical accounts. (p. 13)

The world that the paradigmatic mode of thought attempts to create is the ideal
of a formal, mathematical system of description and explanation of the experienced
world, which employs categorization or conceptualization and the operations by
which categories are established, instantiated, idealized, and related one to the other
to form a system (p. 12). The world that the narrative mode of thought attempts
to create is a world made up entirely of the psychic realities of the protagonists,
leaving knowledge of the real world in the realm of the implicit (p. 14).

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 93

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_6
94 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

According to Brunner (1986), the narrative has two landscapes: one is the land-
scape of action, consisting of agent, intention, situation, and instrument, and the
other is the landscape of consciousness, i.e., what those involved in the action know,
think, or feel. Moreover, there are at least three forms of narrative: life as narrative,
art form as narrative, and human-making of experience and knowledge as narrative.

6.2 The Human-Making Experience as a Narrative

The human-making of experience and knowledge is the most ubiquitous of the three
forms of narrative. Bruner (2006) provides a characterization of the narrative as the
human-making of experience and knowledge. First a narrative is sequence of events
enacted in the form of a discourse, which recounts a violation of canonicality
(p. 154). Its aim is to restore or explicate the imbalance that prompted the telling
of the story. Some researchers have attempted to provide operational denitions of a
narrative when the latter is used in a research context. Herman (2009) identies four
characteristic features of a narrative: it is situated in a particular sociocultural setting;
it is also constituted of time-sequenced events; third, a disruption occurs in the events
in the world for a story or narrative to be told; and nally, there is a central concern
for what it is like for the narrator to relate the personal experience. Based on Bruners
characterization of a narrative as it appears in his publications since 1986, Healy and
Sinclair (2007) offer an operational denition of a narrative which includes the
inherent sequencing of events; its focus is on real or imaginary events (a certain
sense of factual indifference pervades); the forging of connections between the
exceptional and the ordinary; and the presence of some kind of dramatic quality.
In Acts of Meaning, Bruner (1990) focuses on the connection between narrative
and culture. Culture provides symbolic systems which offer the tools necessary to
construct meaning. This meaning, created via culture, is communal in the sense that
it is public and shared. Humans are born into worlds (cultures) constituted by these
symbolic systems. Narrative thought is essential here as the organizing principle of
culture is narrative rather than logical or conceptual. The way to get to know this
culture is through the material that constitutes a story: human agents doing things
on the basis of their beliefs and desires, striving for goals, meeting obstacles which
they best or which best them, all of this extended over time (p. 42).

6.3 Mathematics-Making as a Narrative

A distinction must be made between mathematics-making and nished mathe-

matics. Mathematics-making is the process of making mathematics by human
agents (mathematicians), whereas mathematics as nished refers to the product of
the process of making mathematics and consists of mathematics as it exists in the
form of mathematical discourse in books, journals, and other textual and electronic
6.3 Mathematics-Making as a Narrative 95

repositories. Mathematics discourse is the epitome of the paradigmatic mode of

thought. However, there is the other side of mathematics, i.e., the making of it.
Whatever the source of their mathematical knowledge (and mathematicians disagree
on that), the act of mathematicians while thinking and producing their mathematics
is driven by their knowledge, beliefs, intentions, and commitments. This invisible
act of producing mathematics by human agents has the elements of a story. Why are
mathematicians drawn to a certain problem? How do they go about dening it?
What metaphors do they use and why? What frustrations do they experience when
they reach a dead end after a lot of work? What enjoyment do they get when they
reach the end? These are just a few of the questions that mathematicians as human
agents struggle with, whether consciously or unconsciously. All of these are aspects
of human vicissitudethe stuff stories are made of. How could then the making of
mathematics be a narrative when the ending of the story is the same regardless of the
narrator? The answer is that nished mathematics is not the story of the human agent
creating it, but rather another story in another world, where idealization reaches
its peak by concealing the efforts and frustrations of the narrator and by expressing
the story in a discourse invented by the community of mathematicians. In fact, a
mathematician would suppress any attempt or desire to personalize the story of
creating ones own mathematics, simply and understandably, because this would be
looked at as a weakness since the paradigmatic discourse is the only accepted norm
in the community of mathematicians for communicating mathematics.

6.3.1 Example of a Mathematics-Making Narrative:

An Epistemological Drama

One example of mathematics-making as a narrative is Lakatoss epistemological

drama, Proofs and Refutations (1976). Lakatos tells an unusual story of how math-
ematical concepts are discovered in the form of a play. In his book, Lakatos presents
a play where a teacher and his students (names are from the Greek alphabet)
debate Eulers conjecture (also known as Eulers formula), which states that in a
polyhedron V E + F = 2 (V is # of vertices, E is # of edges, F is # of faces). The class
of students conducts this debate in order to improve the concept of a polyhedron.
The play uses a dialogue art form in order to capture the changes in the concepts as
they happen. Lakatos connects his ctional debate with actual work of mathemati-
cians by the use of detailed footnotes. The change in the concept of a polyhedron
takes place when a new object or a new proof is introduced. For example, one of the
students (Alpha) introduces the hollow cube (a solid formed of a cube inside a cube)
and states that the formula is not applicable to it since the sum in the Eulers formula
in this case is 4. Another student argues that the hollow cube is not a polyhedron;
thus, the group decides to redene polyhedron to allow for the new object. When the
teacher introduces a proof (attributed to Cauchy), for the Eulers conjecture, in
which one face of the polyhedron is removed and the remaining network of faces is
stretched out onto a plane, another student objects that this proof changes the
96 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

concept of a polyhedron from a solid to a plane network and argues that the hollow
cube should be excluded again from being a polyhedron. This process of proofs and
refutations (by counter example) continues until a new concept is dened. Lakatoss
method of proofs and refutations starts with a proof for a conjecture; when a counter
example appears, the counter example is built into the theorem as a condition. This
pattern of proofs and refutations, if used often enough, will dene a new concept.
However, there is no guarantee that this new concept will not be challenged by using
the same method.
Obviously, this resembles a play in which human agents, using their knowledge,
are debating the bumpy growth of mathematical concepts in an attempt to interpret
and reinterpret their meanings to resolve epistemological crises among themselves.
In their attempts to resolve these crises, the students are constructing new narrative
which enables the agent to understand both how he or she could intelligibly have
held his or her original beliefs and how he or she could have been so drastically
misled by them (MacIntyre, 1977, p. 455). The drama here is that we will never
possess the truth and that what we can claim is that this is the best account which
anyone has been able to give so far, and that our beliefs about what the marks of a
best account so far will themselves change in what are at present in unpredictable
ways (p. 455).

6.3.2 Example of a Mathematics-Making as a Life Experience

Many narratives of mathematics-making appear in autobiographies of mathemati-

cians or history of mathematics books. One of the unique books in this regard is
Mathematics and the Imagination (Kasner & Newman, 1961), which narrates beau-
tiful stories of how big mathematical ideas and discoveries have come about. These
narratives are not about mathematical ideas only, but also about their creators. Each
narrative about the creation of a mathematical idea in this book provides, in simple
but powerful English discourse, the sequence of events, the actions of the creators
of the ideas, and the temporal cultural contexts in which these events took place to
create the mathematical idea in question.
In the introduction of Mathematics and the Imagination (Kasner & Newman,
1961), the authors make it very clear that their book is not a history of mathematical
ideas, but rather about the human agents (mathematicians) and their creation/dis-
covery of mathematics. The quotation below gives the aim of the book from their
perspectives.
Haute vulgarization is the term applied by the French to that happy result which neither
offends by its condescension nor leaves obscure in a mass of technical verbiage. It has been
our aim to extend the process of haute vulgarization to those outposts of mathematics
which are mentioned, if at all, only in a whisper; which are referred to, if at all, only by
name; to show by its very diversity something of the character of mathematics, of its bold,
untrammeled spirit, of how, as both an art and a science, it has continued to lead the creative
faculties beyond even imagination and intuition. (p. xiv)
6.4 Problem Solving as a Narrative 97

To illustrate the narratives in this book, the text of the narrative describing how
topology came into being is included below:
Once upon a time seven bridges crossed the river Pregel as it twisted through the little
German university town of Konigsberg. Four of them led from opposite banks to the small
island, Kneiphof. One bridge connected Kneiphof with another island; the other two joined
this with the mainland. These seven bridges of the eighteenth century furnished the material
for one of the celebrated problems of mathematics.
Seemingly trivial problems have given rise to the development of several mathematical
theories. Probability rattled out of the dice cups of the young noblemen of France; Rubber-
Sheet Geometry was brewed in the gemtliche air of the taverns of Knigsberg. The simple
German folk were not gamblers, but they did enjoy their walks. Over their beer steins they
inquired: How can a Sunday afternoon stroller plan his walk so as to cross each of our
seven bridges without re-crossing any of them?
Repeated trials led to the belief that this was impossible, but a mathematical proof is
based neither on beliefs nor trials.
Far away in St. Petersburg, the great Euler shivered in the midst of honors and emolu-
ments, as mathematician at the court of Catherine the Great. To Euler, home-sick and weary
of pomp and circumstance, there came in some strange fashion news of this problem from
his fatherland. He solved it with his customary acumen. Topology or Analysis Situs was
founded when he presented his solution to the problem of the Knigsberg bridges before
the Russian Academy at St. Petersburg in 1735. This celebrated memoir proved that the
journey across the seven bridges, as demanded in the problem, was impossible.
(p. 265266).

6.4 Problem Solving as a Narrative

A distinction must be made between problem solving as the process of solving a

problem and the solution of the problem itself, which is the end product of that
process. It is generally acknowledged that the cognitive functioning that underlies
the solution of mathematical problems, as they appear in journals and books, uti-
lizes the paradigmatic mode of thought expressed in mathematical discourse. What
about problem solving itself? Could it be that the narrative mode of thought is pos-
sibly the cognitive functioning underlying mathematical problem solving? The pre-
vious section of this chapter argued for the possibility that mathematics-making,
whose main tool is problem solving, often utilizes the narrative mode of thought.
However, it cannot be ascertained that the narrative mode of thought is used in solv-
ing a particular problem, until somebody decides to tell the story of the process of
solving that problem.
The story of solving a particular problem fails to tell anything about the validity
of the mathematical solution of the problem. In the same vein, the mathematical
solution of a particular problem is not likely to tell the story of solving that prob-
lem, simply because there is only one canonical mathematical solution for a prob-
lem, whereas there might be different stories for solving it. In other words, the
narrative mode of thought underlying problem solving and the paradigmatic mode
98 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

of thought of the nished solution, although not reducible to each other, are com-
plementary in the sense that solution-making is inseparable from the produced
solution.
In the realm of pedagogy, at least three forms of problem solving, in relation to
the mode of thought that underlie them, can be identied: problem solving as an
epistemological narrative, school mathematics problem solving, and everyday prob-
lem solving. The epistemological narrative involves the landscape of cognitive
actions but limits the landscape of consciousness to the epistemology of the human
agent (knowledge and thinking, but not feelings and choices). The typical school
mathematics problem solving involves students in using paradigmatic mode of
thought to solve a decontextualized mathematical problem in order to produce an
idealized solution that conforms to the accepted standards of mathematics. The
third form of problem solving is the one we enact in our lives in some habitual way
in which the problem and its solution are interwoven into a narrative. In the next
three sections, the three forms of problem solving (as an epistemological narrative,
as a paradigmatic thought, as a life narrative) are demonstrated and contrasted by
three examples.

6.4.1 An Example of Problem Solving an Epistemological

Narrative: Polyas How to Solve It

Polyas book How to Solve It (1948) is perhaps the best known book in mathemat-
ics education. It was reprinted many times, it appeared in paperback, and has been
a best seller, selling more than one million copies. It is a unique book because of its
author, its theme, and its approach. The author, George Polya, was recognized as
one of the leading research mathematicians of the twentieth century and probably
is one of the great fathers of mathematics education. The theme of the book is
problem solving, not only of mathematical problems, but also of problems in any
context, including everyday problems. Moreover, its approach is rooted in the heu-
ristics that mathematicians use when they solve mathematical problem, and at the
same time it provides provocative inspiration and guidance for teachers and
students.
The core feature of the book is what came to be known as Polyas framework of
problem solving. It consists of the four steps of problem solving (understanding the
problem, devising a solution plan, carrying out the plan, looking back) and a set of
questions and suggestions to guide the problem solver. The rest of the book consists
of explanations, extensions, and demonstrations of this framework.
My claim is that part of the impact of Polyas book How to Solve It on students,
teachers, and researchers may be due to its attempt to engage the problem solver
in the narrative mode of thought through its questions and suggestions. My argu-
ment for that claim is based on Bruners (1986) idea that the narrative is consti-
6.4 Problem Solving as a Narrative 99

tuted of two landscapes: landscape of action and landscape of consciousness.

Polyas framework has the structure of an unmistakable sequence of events that has
a start, a development, and a sense of ending. The questions it asks and suggestions
it makes are not about the problem itself, but about the interaction of the human
agency with the problem solvers intentions and choices in the course of solving
the problem. Human choices in the course of making decisions are key ingredients
of the action landscape of the narrative. Next, the questions and suggestions given
by Polya are temporal in nature in the sense that they try to elicit the need of the
problem solver to connect his/her knowledge to the constraints and possibilities of
the context of the problem, such as the following: Is it possible to satisfy the condi-
tion? Have you seen it before? Could you derive something useful from the data?
Could you imagine a more accessible related problem? Interaction of the human
agent with the context is again a feature of the action landscape of a narrative.
However, Polyas questions and suggestions are restricted to thinking and knowl-
edge, but do not include the feelings, of the problem solver. Unlike Bruners char-
acterization of the consciousness landscape of a narrative, which includes human
feelings in addition to knowing and thinking, Polyas consciousness is restricted to
thinking and knowledge. That is why I believe that Polyas framework is more of
an epistemological narrative since it has all the feature of a narrative except that his
landscape involves knowing and thinking but not feelings.
The following quotation from Polyas book supports the above argument:
All the questions and suggestions of our list are natural, simple, obvious, just plain common
sense; but they state plain common sense in general terms. They suggest a certain conduct
which comes naturally to any person who is seriously concerned with his problem and has
some common sense. But the person who behaves the right way usually does not care to
express his behavior in clear words, and possibly, he cannot express it so; our list tries to
express it so. (p. 3) [italics are mine]

In the above quotation, Polya notes that his questions and suggestions are natu-
ral, plain common sense, which, according to Bruner (1990), is part of the commu-
nal meaning in the sense that it is both public and shared. The quotation refers to the
conduct and behaviors of the person, which means that Polya is concerned with
actions involved in problem solving as a human activity and not as a mathematical
activity. Also Polya refers to the expression of the behavior of the problem solver,
which in the context seems to mean communication in language. All of these indi-
cate that Polya was concerned with the narrative in Bruners sense before the latter
introduced it in the construct of narrative 40 years later.

6.4.2 Example of Problem Solving as a Life Narrative

This section presents the actions of a hypothetical typical buyer (denoted by B) in

solving a car loan problem task (Fig. 6.1) in the real world (Jurdak, 2006).
(B) may choose not to engage in the task, but in the case of choosing to
engage, (B) decides on the place, time, and form of engagement. The responsibility
100 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

of formulating and posing the problem falls on (B). The object is embodied in a
concrete outcome (buying the car under affordable conditions).
(B) is not only concerned about the total cost but also about the monthly pay-
ments and the period of payment and their relation to the expected cash ow. (B)
may use digital means to perform the calculation, but in case this means is not avail-
able or possible may call the company to nd out the total cost of each option.
By considering the total cost, the annual payments, and the period of payments,
(B) engages in a process of relating the quantities in order to choose the option that
is optimal to the existing nancial status. All mathematical computations are not
visible in this case.
Because the consequence of the decision is materially important, (B) validates
the decision by probably discussing it with signicant others or persons with more
expertise in this area.

6.4.3 Example of Problem Solving as a Paradigmatic Thought

In this section we present an example taken from Jurdak (2006) which involves a car
loan task (Fig. 6.1). The problem-solving practices below are typical actions by a
student (denoted by S).
(S) has no choice in selecting the task, presented in the form of a narrative which,
by its nature, is an interpretive act that embodies the authors (teacher or textbooks)
choice of the events. The object is to nd answers to the questions in the task. (S)
has little ownership of the outcome of solving this problem.
Because the task is school-like, (S) is habitually obliged to use his/her knowl-
edge of school mathematics in trying to nd the appropriate mathematical concepts
and procedures that can describe the situation. Depending on knowledge and prefer-
ences, (S) may choose to use the exponential function, or compound interest
formula, or to calculate the cost for each year of the loan. The erroneous choice of
the model has little consequence to (S).
Figure 6.2 presents a self-explanatory contrast between problem solving as a life
narrative and as a paradigmatic thought in terms of human agency, sequence of
events, structure, and criterion for resolving the issue.

Rasamny Youniss Company is making a special offer on Nissan-Almera cars, model 1999,
and automatic/full option for $13950. Now, you have two options for payment by install-
ments, either through the bank or through the company itself. Through the bank, and with a
down payment of $5,000, you can pay, at a 12% annual interest rate on the balance, $305
at the end of each month. However, using the second option, and with a down payment of
$5,000 you can repay, by equal monthly installments for 36 months at an annual interest
rate of 7.5% on the total.(1) Suppose you decide to pay the total remaining amount after 6
months. Using each option, how much do you have to pay to close your account? (2) Which
is the most convenient option for paying for the car?

Fig. 6.1 The car loan task (Jurdak, 2006)

6.5 Narrative as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics 101

problem solving as life narrative Problem solving as paradigmatic thought

1. Human agency: The problem solver has full 1. Human passiveness: The problem
freedom to define intentions and choose solver is constrained by symbolic
actions or modify aspects of the problem. actions within mathematics.

2. Sequence of events is determined by 2. Sequence of steps is determined by

the intention of the problem solver. mathematical rules and regulations.
3. Only One way of starting, developing,
3. A flexible structure exists, which allows the
adoption of different options of starting, and ending the symbolic actions exists.
developing, and ending the events.

4. Criterion for resolving the issue is personal 4. Criterion for resolving the issue is
(affordability) mathematical standards

Fig. 6.2 Contrast between problem solving as a life narrative and as a paradigmatic thought

6.5 Narrative as an Interface Between Problem Solving

in School Mathematics and in the Real World

In Chap. 4, it was argued that narrative is a powerful boundary object that can be
structured to enable students to cross the boundary between real-world and school
mathematics problem solving. This section explores possible instructional designs
which serve as narrative mediating artifacts to cross the boundary between real-
world and school mathematics problem solving.

6.5.1 Polyas Expanded Framework of Problem Solving

This chapter has argued that Polyas framework of problem solving attempts to
invoke the narrative mode of thought but is restricted by the problem solvers epis-
temological consciousness of mathematical knowledge and thinking. However,
Polyas framework can be expanded to elicit the total consciousness of the problem
solvers real-world experiences relating to the specic problem at hand. This can be
done by adding to Polyas framework experiential questions and suggestions that
invoke not only the students consciousness of epistemological features of the prob-
lem but also the students affective and personal features of the problem in relation
to the problem solver. Figure 6.3 provides examples of experiential questions and
suggestions that may be added to promote narrative thinking in Polyas framework
of problem solving. These additional questions and suggestions are in bold italics
and are intended to enhance the problem solvers agency, give rise to consciousness
of real-world problem solving, and arouse beliefs and feelings regarding school
102 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

UNDERSTANDING THE PROBLEM

What is the unknown? What are the data? What is the condition? Is it possible to satisfy
the condition? Is the condition sufficient?
Determine the unknown? Or is it insufficient? Or redundant? Or contradictory'?
Draw a figure. Introduce suitable notation.
Separate the various parts of the condition. Can you write them down?
Does the problem make sense to you in the real world? In science?
If you were given the choice to proceed or not proceed to solve the problem, what
would you choose and why?
DEVISING A PLAN
Have you seen it before? Or have you seen the same problem in a slightly different form?
Do you know a related problem? Do you know a theorem that could be useful?
Have you seen or experienced a similar problem in the real world? If yes, in what way
is it similar? In what way is it different?
Look at the unknown! And try to think of a familiar problem having the same or a similar
unknown.
Here is a problem related to yours and solved before. Could you use it? Could you use its
result? Could you use its method?
Should you introduce some auxiliary element in order to make its use possible?
Could you restate the problem? Could you restate it still differently? Go back to
definitions.)
If you cannot solve the proposed problem try to solve first some related problem. Could
you imagine a more accessible related problem? A more general problem? A more
special problem? An analogous problem?
Could you solve a part of the problem? Keep only a part of the condition, drop the other
part; how far is the unknown then determined, how can it vary?
Could you derive something useful from the data? Could you think of other data
appropriate to determine the unknown?
Could you change the unknown or the data, or both if necessary, so that the new
unknown and the new data are nearer to each other?
Could you change the unknown or the data, or both if necessary, so that the new
unknown and the new data make more sense in the real world?
Did you use all the data? Did you use the whole condition? Have you taken into account
all essential notions involved in the problem?
Does the plan you devised for solving the problem arouse any feelings in you? What
are they?
CARRYING OUT THE PLAN
Carrying out your plan of the solution, check each step. Can you see clearly that the step
is correct? Can you prove that it is correct?
Would you use the same kind of plan in solving real world problems?
LOOKING BACK
Can you check the result? Can you check the argument? Can you derive the result
differently? Can you see it at a glance?
Can you use the result, or the method, for some other problem?
Does the solution of this problem help in solving real world problems? How?

Fig. 6.3 Expanded Polyas framework of problem solving (additions are in bold italics)

mathematics problem solving. These additions can apply to any problem, even if it
is a purely mathematical problem because these questions will enhance students
awareness of the differences between solving problems in school mathematics and
in the real world.
6.5 Narrative as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics 103

6.5.2 Journal Writing About Real-World Problem Solving

Journal writing is a form of reective writing by individuals about their experiences,

opinions, observations, feelings, and ideas. Normally, journal writing is not a one-
time activity but rather an ongoing periodic activity. It can reect freestyle writing
or be prompted by another person. The purposes of journal writing include personal
growth, reection on events, professional development, or developing an art narra-
tive. Journal writing under certain conditions may be regarded as a narrative in
Bruners sense, i.e., as life-making if it is a self-telling narrative about ones own life
or world-making if it is a narrative about others. For journal writing to be a narra-
tive, it should exhibit the following features: an inherent sequencing of events; a
focus on real or imaginary events (a certain sense of factual indifference pervades);
a forged connection between the exceptional and the ordinary; and some kind of
dramatic quality (Healy & Sinclair, 2007).
Research on journal writing in problem solving in mathematics has been the
subject of a variety of investigations, the majority of which dealt with it as a lan-
guage skill and not as mode of reasoning in Bruners sense. Nevertheless, although
journal writing as a language skill and as a mode of reasoning differ in their theo-
retical denitions and interpretations, they share many features on the practical
level. The ndings of the studies generally indicated that using journal writing as a
tool for learning and communicating in problem solving in mathematics is positive.
Bicer, Capraro, and Capraro (2013) report evidence that grade 9 students who
focused on the writing process with mathematical problem solving were more likely
to generate and apply better problem-solving skills as compared to a control group.
Hensberry and Jacobbe (2012) report the results of a study involving the use of
Polyas heuristic for problem solving, in which students were required to articulate
their thought processes through the use of a structured diary. Their ndings indicate
that having students write about their thinking may be benecial for developing
their problem-solving skills. Taylor and McDonald (2007) report evidence from
research involving a rst-year university mathematics course in which Polyas
problem-solving framework and a writing heuristic were used synergistically with
group work. Their results indicate that this strategy was a success and that it facili-
tated the development of some metacognitive behaviors in the students. Liljedahl
(2007) reports that research on the effectiveness of a persona-based framework for
guiding students journal writing to reect on the erratic to-and-fro of the
problem-solving process indicates that this persona-based framework is effective in
producing more representative journals.
In summary, both theory and empirical evidence suggest that journal writing is a
powerful candidate to be a boundary object that can interface problem solving in
school mathematics and in the real world. The power of the narrative is that it is a
natural practice for all human beings, regardless of language, age, gender, or race.
All that is needed to invest in this powerful instrument in school mathematics is
some channeling and structuring of this naturally occurring resource.
104 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

6.5.3 Modeling Narratives

Chapter 5 introduced modeling as a boundary object for interfacing problem solv-

ing in school mathematics and in the real world. The essence of modeling consists
of linking mathematics to the real world. The essence of the narrative consists of
linking the human agency to the real world. Combined, the interactions between
modeling and narrative can act as a potent system for interfacing problem solving in
school mathematics and in the real world. Thus, modeling will provide a context for
activating the narrative mode of thought, and reciprocally the narrative will provide
a language discourse that should contribute to enhancing the understanding of the
mathematical discourse of the real-world situation.
Again, combining modeling and narrative does not require more than simple
adjustments to the instructional design. If students are to be involved in modeling,
all it takes to integrate narrative into modeling is to require students to report the
problem-solving activity that arises from the modeling process in both narrative and
mathematical discourses.

6.5.4 Historical Narratives About Mathematics-Making

History mathematics books are replete with narratives about mathematics-making,

and mathematics-making is, after all, a problem-solving process. Asking students to
interact with such narratives and to write their own narratives about their interac-
tions with the mathematics-making narrative would engage them in problem solv-
ing as a real-world phenomenon. Writing narratives about mathematics-making
provides a simple but powerful interface between problem solving in school and the
underlying real-world stories of mathematicians as they struggled to make the math-
ematics students study in schools.

6.6 My Narrative About Narrative

By the mid-1990s, I had not had the opportunity to learn about Bruners ideas on
narrative and paradigmatic modes of thought. During the early 1970s when I was
doing my PhD at the University of Madison, Wisconsin, Bruner was the towering
cognitive psychologist in mathematics education because of his role in providing
the psychological rationale and justication of the new mathematics movement in
the USA. His two books, Process of Education and Toward a Theory of Instruction,
were obligatory reading for any graduate student in mathematics education. It was
Bruners book Actual Minds, Possible Worlds (1986) that shook my beliefs about
the complete separation between mathematics and the real world. Bruners ideas
6.6 My Narrative About Narrative 105

about narrative and paradigmatic modes of thought helped me eventually integrate

the world of mathematics and the real world into one world where these two coexist
as different but complementary ways of world-making. Even mathematics making
is itself a narrative, although the nished mathematics is the epitome of paradig-
matic mode of thought.
One book that contributed to my understanding of narrative is Mathematics and
the Imagination (Kasner & Newman, 1961). I had that book for over 40 years and I
used to occasionally read parts of it. Before I had the chance to be introduced to
Bruners work on the narrative mode of thought, that book was for me an interesting
way to understand advanced mathematical concepts from an elementary point of
view. After I became familiar with Bruners narrative of thought, I started to look at
the book from a different perspective. My conception shifted from a static concep-
tion of mathematics as an abstract, beautiful, decontextualized eld of knowledge to
a dynamic one, in which mathematics is viewed as an ongoing process of creating
possible worlds as mathematicians struggle to make sense of their human experi-
ences. From that point on, the book became a source of inspiration for thinking
about the what and the how of structuring my mathematics education courses.
An opportunity allowed me to become engaged in narrative mode of thought
without actually knowing about its theoretical underpinnings. In 1998, one of my
graduate students, Rihab Abu Zein, a middle school mathematics teacher, was inter-
ested in journal writing in mathematics and we decided together to conduct a teach-
ing experiment for grade 8 students where a journal writing(JW) group received the
same mathematics instruction as a group that did no journal writing. The one differ-
ence was that the journal writing group engaged in prompted journal writing for
710 min at the end of each class period, three times a week, for 12 weeks, a period
during which the no-journal-writing group engaged in solving exercises. The nd-
ings suggest that journal writing had a positive impact on conceptual understanding,
procedural knowledge, and mathematical communication, but not problem solving,
and attitudes toward mathematics. However, qualitative analysis of student responses
to a questionnaire indicated that students found journal writing to have both cogni-
tive and affective benets (Jurdak & Abu Zein, 1998). Although the paper does not
offer any theoretical explanations for these ndings in terms of Bruners narrative
mode of thought, it generated interest among researchers (cited more than 70 times
according to Google Scholar, at the time I was writing this chapter). It also gener-
ated interest among students and parents who wanted the practice of journal writing
to continue beyond the teaching experiment. Why did this unexpected interest in
journal writing generate such an interest among students, teachers, and mathematics
educators/researchers? In hindsight, and a decade after the publication of the article,
I discovered Bruners narrative mode of thought which provided me with a satisfac-
tory answer to that question: Simply said, the journal writing that we used in the
study was a form of narrative writing and the interest it generated is probably
because journal writing was viewed as a sense-making tool of learning mathematics
in support of Bruners idea that narrative as a mode of reasoning is a crucial com-
munal tool for ongoing sense-making.
106 6 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of the Narrative Mode of Thought

In 2007, I nally had an opportunity to actually apply the narrative mode of

thought in TAMAM project, a school-based reform project in the Arab region
(Chap. 4, Sect. 4.10 includes more details about TAMAM project). Toward the end
of the rst phase of the project, I started to observe that the participating university
professors and the school administrators and teachers acquired a form of learning
that was different from that of my university students. In their project work, my
university students approached the learning process with little previous experiential
learning, so in their course work they were engaged in simulating reality rather than
in experiencing it. On the other hand, the TAMAM participants brought with them
to their learning in TAMAM a rich capital of actual experiences which in many
respects was more than our experiences as university professors. I decided that the
complex learning of TAMAM participants, including the participating university
professors, deserved to be brought out without compromising its authenticity, indi-
viduality, and uniqueness. This was when the narrative came to my mind, and I
decided to transform the individual experiences of TAMAM participants into stories
written by the individuals themselves and in their own native language (Arabic).
The book which contained about 25 narratives was completed and published online
on the TAMAM website (Jurdak, 2014).

References

Bicer, A., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2013). Integrating writing into mathematics class-
room to increase students problem solving skills. International Online Journal of Educational
Sciences, 5(2), 361396.
Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. S. (2006). In search of pedagogy: The selected works of Jerome S. Bruner. London:
Routledge.
Brunner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Healy, I., & Sinclair, N. (2007). If this is our mathematics, what are our stories? International
Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 12(1), 321.
Hensberry, K. K. R., & Jacobbe, T. (2012). The effects of Polyas heuristic and diary writing on
childrens problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(1), 5985.
Herman, D. (2009). Basic elements of narrative. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Jurdak, M. (2006). Contrasting perspectives and performance of high school students on problem
solving in real world, situated, and school contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3),
283301.
Jurdak, M., & Abu Zein, R. (1998). The effect of journal writing on achievement in and attitudes
toward mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 412419.
Jurdak, M. (Editor-in-chief) (2014). TAMAM: Voices from the field (In Arabic). Retrieved from
http://tamamproject.org/research/tamam-voices-from-the-eld/.
Kasner, E., & Newman, J. R. (1961). Mathematics and the imagination. London: G. Bells and Sons.
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Liljedahl, P. (2007). Persona-based journaling: Striving for authenticity in representing the
problem-solving process. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 5(4),
661680.
References 107

MacIntyre, A. (1977). Epistemological crises, dramatic narrative and the philosophy of science.
The Monist, 60(4), 453472.
Plya, G. (1948). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Taylor, J. A., & McDonald, C. (2007). Writing in groups as a tool for non-routine problem solving
in rst year university mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Education in
Science & Technology, 38(5), 639655.
Chapter 7
Real-World Problem Solving
From the Perspective of Critical
Mathematics Education

Mathemacy can be interpreted in different ways, and I interpret

it as also referring to social response-ability. This makes
possible to formulate some of the aspirations of critical
mathematics education, including what it could mean to
establish a mathematics education for critical citizenship.
(Skovsmose, 2011, p. 3)

Chapter 7 explores the implications of critical mathematics education for learning

and teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics. It begins by pre-
senting Paulo Freires ideas on emancipatory education as a background to critical
mathematics education. Next, it presents critical mathematics education, primarily
as articulated by Ole Skovsmose. Then, it presents and compares two narratives on
critical mathematics education in practice. Finally, it explores the implications of
critical mathematics education for problem solving and the potential of critical
mathematics education as an interface between problem solving in school mathe-
matics and in the real world.

7.1 Paulo Freires Emancipatory Education

One of Freires central themes is that education should not be neutral, and he argues
strongly that, for education to serve the struggles of humanity and liberation from
oppression, it should always be linked to broader social movements. Based on his
literacy campaign in his native country, Brazil, Freire developed the concept of
emancipatory literacy (Freire & Macedo, 1987), which he frames in terms of two
interconnected components: reading the world, i.e., developing a critical under-
standing of ones own life conditions and the broader society, through reading the
word, that is acquiring text literacy on the one hand; and writing the world, i.e.,
changing it to overcome injustice through critical intervention in reality on the other.
To achieve the goal of emancipating students by developing their abilities to read
and write their world, Freire advocates the adoption of problem-posing pedagogies
as an alternative to what he called banking education (Freire, 1970/2013). Banking
education is an act of depositing, in which the teacher is the depositor and the

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 109

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_7
110 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

students are depositories, and similarly with a bank account the scope of action of
the student is limited to receiving, ling, and storing the deposits. The banking con-
cept of education negates education and knowledge as processes of inquiry and
considers knowledge to be a gift bestowed by those who consider themselves knowl-
edgeable upon those whom they consider to be ignorant; in this way, banking educa-
tion projects the ideology of oppression. In contrast, by abandoning the dichotomy
between teacher and student, problem-posing pedagogies render educators as con-
stantly re-forming their own reections, with the students becoming no longer doc-
ile listeners but rather critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher.
In describing emancipatory education, Freire (1994) emphasizes the human
agency of both students and teachers. Students are actively involved in remaking
themselves and their society through the construct of praxis, incorporating the two
simultaneous processes of reection and action. Students, increasingly dealing with
problems relating to themselves in the world and with the world, will feel more
challenged and obliged to respond to that challenge, thus developing critical con-
sciousness of their context and their world. Freire dwells on the human agency of
teachers through their own praxis in defending their views while creating problem-
posing pedagogies and appropriate spaces for students to engage in emancipatory
learning. However, Freire (1970/2013) advocates that teachers should not identify
injustices for students because the students themselves have to unveil the latter
through their own praxis. He believes that the oppressed (i.e., marginalized stu-
dents) and their critical leaders (i.e., teachers) should be collaboratively united to
fulll the goals of emancipatory education.
Freire (1970/2013) contrasts several dimensions of banking education and
problem-posing pedagogies. Whereas banking education inhibits creative power,
problem-posing education involves a constant unveiling of reality, encouraging cre-
ativity in dealing with it. Problem-posing pedagogies negate the banking education
assumption that human beings are independent and isolated from the world and
afrm that the world does not exist as a reality apart from people. Problem-posing
pedagogies assume that education is constantly remade in praxis, so Freire declares
that in order to be, it must become (p. 84). The banking method emphasizes per-
manence and is thus reactionary; problem-posing education emphasizes the dynamic
present and consequently tends to become revolutionary. Whereas the banking
method directly or indirectly creates a fatalistic perception of the learning situation,
problem-posing pedagogies enhance students hopeful perception of their situation
in terms of problems that can be addressed through praxis.

7.2 Critical Mathematics Education

The inuential works of Marilyn Frankenstein and Ole Skovsmose are generally
considered to have set the foundations for what is now called critical mathematics
education. Frankenstein (1983) was the rst to use the term critical mathematics
education in connection with Paulo Freires epistemology. Frankenstein applied
7.2 Critical Mathematics Education 111

Paulo Freires critical education theory in the context of her own experience of
teaching basic mathematics and statistics for the social sciences to urban working-
class adults. She explored Freires concept of critical knowledge and how it can
challenge the hegemonic ideologies reinforced by current uses of mathematics in
industrial societies. For example, she used Freires concept of critical knowledge to
show why and how ofcial statistics are much more useful to conservatives than to
radicals. She argued that critical mathematics education is vital in the struggle for
liberatory social change in advanced technological society.
The work of Ole Skovsmose has brought critical mathematics education to a new
level of theoretical sophistication. Skovsmose introduced many renements to his
theory of critical mathematics education (CME) between the publication of his rst
book Towards a Philosophy of Critical Mathematics Education (1994) and his most
recent book on the subject, Invitation to Mathematics Education (Skovsmose,
2011). This chapter limits itself to presenting Skovsmoses CME as it appears in his
most recent book.
A central concept in Skovsmoses theory of Critical Mathematics Education
(2011) is the relationship between mathematics, discourse, and power. Starting with
the ideas of Michel Foucault, Skovsmose stipulates a relationship between power
and language in the sense that the assumed reality described by scientic language
might reect categories incorporated in the language of description, which in itself is
a powerful tool of formatting. Power can be expressed by the applied language as a
means of formatting reality. On the other hand, language also includes resources for
behavior because any language expression includes actions. According to Skovsmose:
If we combine the two ideas, i.e. that language is part of a formatting of reality and that
language includes actions, then the way is opened for a performative interpretation of lan-
guage and of the power-language interaction and in particular with respect to mathemat-
ics.(p. 61)

Thus, mathematics draws its power by being a formal language that can format
reality in many different ways, and as a language it provides different possibilities
for performative interpretation of mathematics.
A second pillar in Skovsmoses CME is the critical conception of mathematics
itself. He identies ve aspects of mathematics in action: (1) technological imagina-
tion, (2) hypothetical reasoning, (3) legitimation or justication, (4) realization, and
(5) dissolution of responsibility. For him, mathematics represents a rationality
which could serve any purpose. Mathematics does not contain any essence, which
provides mathematics-based actions with any particular qualities. Mathematics in
action could come to serve any interests (p. 69). Thus mathematics application can
go in any direction and that is why it is critical.
A third pillar in Skovsmoses CME is the concept of reection. Simply put,
because it is critical, i.e., its application can go in any direction, mathematics in
action is in need of reection. Reection involves judgment of actions, and may be
viewed from an ethical or philosophical perspective. However, Skovsmose (2011)
views reection as an expression of an ethical concern as well as being an everyday
activity (p. 72). He identies three types of reection in mathematics education.
Reflection on mathematics involves issues of reliability and responsibility in using
112 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

mathematics. For example, in quality control, issues of the reliability of the data
could be raised and also the question of taking responsible decisions based on the
data could be a source for reection. Reflection with mathematics involves the use
of mathematics for formulating, strengthening and specifying a broad variety of
socio-political and economic reections (p. 77). Reflection through mathematics
involves reection on mathematical insight and mathematics in action. Including
challenging questions is important in order to facilitate and to provoke reection.
A central concept in Skovsmoses CME is the concept of mathemacy. According
to him, mathematics education as a form of socializing students into certain per-
spectives, discourses and techniques which are imperative for the present techno-
logical and economic framework (p. 83) may serve as the functional basis of a
mathemacy. In addition, Skovsmose relates mathemacy to the notion of literacy as
described by Paulo Freire. Thus, mathemacy can be seen as a way of reading the
world (developing critical consciousness of the world in terms of numbers and g-
ures); as a way of acting, through which one tries to grasp social, political, cultural,
and economic features of ones life-world; and also as a way of writing the world,
i.e., as the active way of changing this world through mathematics.

7.3 Critical Mathematics Education in Practice:

Possibilities and Challenges

Theoretical argumentation is much more apparent than empirical evidence in schol-

arly publications on critical mathematics education. However, the conclusions of
empirical research on critical mathematics education pose some challenges to its
ultimate goals: reading the world (critical consciousness of it through reection on
the use of mathematics) and writing the world (changing it through action using
mathematics). Some of those challenges are theoretical and relate to the assump-
tions and goals of critical mathematics education while others are empirical in
nature. In this section, I shall try to identify some of those challenges as they appear,
explicitly or implicitly, in the literature. I shall focus mainly, but not exclusively, on
two case studies that are often cited in the literature: one was conducted in South
Africa by Vithal (2003) and another in the USA by Gutstein (2006). What follows
is a brief description of those two studies.
In her book In Search of a Pedagogy of Conflict and Dialogue for Mathematics
Education (Vithal, 2003), based on her Ph.D. dissertation under the sponsorship of
Skovsmose, Vithal focuses on investigating what happened in a mathematics class-
room when student teachers attempted to integrate a critical perspective in the school
mathematics curriculum in post-apartheid South Africa. In framing methodological
theoretical tools to guide the investigation, she distinguishes between three situa-
tions: the actual current situation (how things were), an imagined hypothetical
situation (how, theoretically guided, things might be), and an arranged situation
(a compromise, under the constraints of reality). The student teachers focused on
project work, which became the primary means to construct the arranged situation
7.3 Critical Mathematics Education in Practice: Possibilities and Challenges 113

in the study. She includes in her study detailed crucial description, a strategy
which makes it possible for an outsider to make a critique of a certain theoretical
position in mathematics education. Her main conclusion is that theoretical critique
is essential for theoretical development, and a source for both critique and develop-
ment lies in what is possible and practical in actual real classrooms (Vithal, 2003,
p. 41). She suggests a critical perspective for mathematics education based on the
pedagogy of conict and dialogue, in which the complementarity between actuality
and potentiality relates to the way the arranged situation represents a compromise
between the current actual situation (in which the students and teachers had a very
narrow view of mathematics) and the imagined hypothetical situation. This can be
achieved by engaging in dialogue to resolve unavoidable conicts before they erupt.
In his book Reading and Writing the World with Mathematics: Toward a
Pedagogy for Social Justice, Gutstein (2006) reported on a 2-year qualitative,
practitioner-research study of teaching and learning mathematics for social justice.
The site of the study was a middle-school mathematics classroom in a Chicago
public school in a Latino community. A major pedagogical goal was to create condi-
tions for students to develop agency, a sense of themselves as subjects in the world.
Gutstein used semi-ethnographic methods including participant-observation, open-
ended surveys, and textual analysis of documents. The data in his study included
students mathematics work and scores from standardized and high school admis-
sions tests; a practitioner journal of personal reections; weekly journal assign-
ments of students reections; real-world projects; and surveys on students attitudes
and dispositions toward mathematics. His main conclusion is that, given the empir-
ical evidence, there is enough justication to warrant a provisional claim: teaching
mathematics for social justice in urban, public schools-in which developing agency
is a central part-can make a difference in students lives beyond the classroom
(Gutstein, 2007. p. 444).
Almost all critical mathematics researchers expressed, to varying degrees, com-
mitment to the goals and ideals espoused by critical mathematics education.
Nevertheless, many researchers identied, directly or indirectly, some challenges
arising from the complexity of the implementation of critical mathematics educa-
tion projects in the school setting, while a few cited possible contradictions in its
theoretical underpinnings. I shall try here to identify the claimed challenges associ-
ated with critical mathematics education and analyze them in terms of their
theoretical and/or empirical underpinnings. The rst challenge is the view that the
call of critical mathematics education for a critical consciousness of the world for
changing it is an ideal that is simultaneously highly valued and desired, yet hardly
achievable in the current systems of education. The claim maintains that as such,
critical education discourse tends to justify the present education systems.
Admittedly, the challenge is framed in the Marxist-Hegelian dialectics; however,
the evidence from empirical research on critical mathematics education points out
that almost insurmountable empirical obstacles stand in the way of implementing
critical education in school systems, although the commitment of critical mathemat-
ics education researchers seems tenacious in pursuing it. The curriculum seems one
of those obstacles. For example, Vithal (2003) in her study in post-apartheid South
114 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

Africa arrives at the conclusion that The theory of critical (mathematics) education
is not as well developed with respect to its expression, implications and implemen-
tation in national curricula for macro settings (p. 52). Gutstein (2007) says in refer-
ence to his study in Chicago, USA, that the curriculum that was based on National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) 2000 standards is not oriented
toward sociopolitical consciousness or agency, the dispositions toward knowledge
(Gutstein, 2007, p. 426). Accountability as reected in assessment practices is
another major obstacle in the way of implementing critical mathematics education.
Gutstein (2007) refers to such an obstacle arising from the current political and
educational situation in the U.S., district, state, and federal mandates of account-
ability, supervision, and regulation, as exemplied and crystallized in the No Child
Left Behind Act (p. 439). In the context of South Africa, Vithal (2003) mentions
the obstacle represented by a discourse of systemic reforms with a concern to meet
the challenges of globalization, especially of the economy and the information era
(p. 34). Students attitudes and disposition toward injustices, teachers insecurity in
taking risks, and reluctance of schools to provide enough space for critical educa-
tion are some of the challenges that are mentioned in the literature as obstacles in
the face of implementing critical mathematics education.
A theoretical challenge that faces critical education is the discrepancy between
the ultimate goal of critical mathematics education to change the world and the
goal of any publicly funded socioeconomic system, including that of schooling, to
maintain its values through socialization. The fact that schools represent in many
cases the values and interests of dominating powerful groups does not mitigate the
discrepancy between critical mathematics education and the school system. Gutstein
(2007) mentions that Freires praxis teaches us that teachers need to create condi-
tions for students to develop sociopolitical awareness and a sense of agency. This
orientation towards students was central to my efforts in teaching mathematics. But
the reality of contemporary urban U.S. classrooms mocks that goal (p. 424). He
also mentions that given the objective nature of both schooling and the current
sociopolitical climate in which we live, what is pedagogy of hope and how do we
encourage the development of students sense of agency? (p. 428).Vithal (2003)
mentions the challenge of dealing with the discrepancy between the actual situation
in South Africa (marked by a continuing authoritarian and undemocratic culture
within schools) and the imagined situation (critical mathematics educations
struggle for student agency and empowerment). She also mentions that there is an
inescapable contradiction in the attempt of critical mathematics education, which
espouses liberty, to impose emancipation or transformation on students.
The challenges that face the attainment of critical mathematics education goals in
their pure form are not likely to be achievable at the macro level in the current sys-
tems of education. Moreover, critical mathematics education research is likely to
remain isolated with micro-level context, with little impact on macro-level main-
stream school mathematics education. In this context, I would like to propose making
critical mathematics education a scalable entity both in scope and intensity rather
than an all-or-nothing entity. My proposal for a viable strategy to enforce a more
organic development of critical mathematics education within the current educational
7.4 Problem Solving as a Critical Mathematics Education Practice 115

systems includes three elements: rst, educating pre- and in-service teachers in the
principles and practice of critical mathematics education; second, enabling schools to
provide more space for more teacher and student agency; and third, delegating the
responsibility of critical mathematics practices to individual schools, their mathemat-
ics teachers and students, thus enhancing teacher and student agency to scale the
scope and intensity of critical mathematics education in accordance with the actuali-
ties of the school.

7.4 Problem Solving as a Critical Mathematics Education

Practice

Mathematics education practices may serve functional or critical mathematical pur-

poses. Functional mathematical practices serve the learning of mathematical con-
cepts and procedures and their applications, while critical mathematical practices
serve the purposes of social responsibility in using mathematics. Although they
may be limited to functional mathematical practices, almost all mathematical prac-
tices can be made to serve critical purposes. Skovsmoses (2011) concept of math-
emacy includes both functional and critical practices. Critical mathematics
education practices are very likely to generate opportunities for students to engage
in real-world problem solving in school mathematics. By its very nature, critical
mathematics education strives for developing praxis, i.e., critical consciousness of
the world and action to change it, and as such its practices have to be embedded and
enacted in the real world. Critical mathematics education seeks to achieve its goal
of developing praxis through problematizing students social realities (Gutstein,
2007, p. 430) which on the one hand raises students awareness of the social issues
(problems), and on the other provides opportunities for using mathematics in real-
world problem solving.
Skovsmose (2011) identies four types of practices in the domain of application
of mathemacy: practices of the marginalized, practices of construction, practices of
operation, and practices of consumption. According to him, mathemacy includes
both the functional and critical aspects of mathematics, and hence these practices
provide opportunities for engaging students in using mathematics in real-world
problem solving while building their critical social competencies. In general, school
mathematics tends to overemphasize the functional aspects of mathematics while
overlooking their critical aspects. What follows shows how the four types of prac-
tices provide opportunities for engaging students in using mathematics in real-world
problem solving while building their critical social competencies.
Problems arising from practices of the marginalized provide opportunities for
students to learn and use mathematics to identify, represent, and quantify aspects of
their marginalization as well as expose the sources and reasons for it. Problems
arising from practices of consumption provide opportunities for students to learn
and use mathematics to manage all kinds of everyday economic transactions as well
as to evaluate the processes and products of consumption. Problems arising from
116 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

practices of operation provide opportunities for students to learn and use mathe-
matics for work procedures as experienced in the workplace, such as at banks, as
well as to question and evaluate the reliability of quantitative and symbolic infor-
mation involved in the operations. Problems arising from practices of construction
provide opportunities for students to learn and use mathematics for broader techno-
logical competence as well as for questioning the assumption that mathematics
ensures neutrality and objectivity.

7.5 Critical Mathematics Education as an Interface

Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics
and in the Real World

Critical practices are rare in the real world as well as in the school, and they are
more so as far as mathematics is concerned. However, critical mathematics educa-
tion discourse and research are becoming increasingly visible and active in mathe-
matics education. There is also an overwhelming call from mathematics educators
and researchers to move toward the goal of incorporating critical mathematics edu-
cation, or aspects of it, in school mathematics.
Though critical mathematics education as an over-arching instructional design is
not likely to serve as a boundary object between the school and real world in the
context of the priorities of the current school systems, certain features of it may be
manipulated to serve as a boundary object between problem solving in school math-
ematics and in the real world. This requires, among other things, enabling teacher
and student agency to scale the scope and intensity of critical mathematics educa-
tion in accordance with the actualities of the school. Next, two possible instructional
designs which serve as critical mathematics education mediating artifacts to cross
the boundary between real-world and school mathematics problem solving are pre-
sented: the critical mathematics education project and student critical reflection on
mathematical practices.

7.5.1 Critical Mathematics Education Project

The CME project has been an established tool used by teachers to develop a variety
of student competencies for decades. The strength of the project as a learning tool
lies in its usefulness with almost any instructional design and its adaptability to dif-
ferent purposes and formats (individual or group, different formats of presentation).
The project has been the main tool used in teaching and learning in critical math-
ematics education research. The proposed critical mathematics education project is
designed to serve the functional feature of mathemacy (learning of mathematical
concepts and competencies), and the critical feature of mathemacy (critical con-
sciousness of mathematics in action), and to interface problem solving in the real
7.5 Critical Mathematics Education as an Interface Between Problem Solving 117

world and in school mathematics. To serve these three purposes, the critical math-
ematics education project can easily be accommodated within a variety of mathe-
matics curricula in schools whose policies allow such projects. Unless the school
policy allows otherwise, the critical mathematics education project should not be
intended to be used as the only or main tool of learning mathematics at school. One
desirable feature of the project is the collaboration between students and teachers.
Since one goal of critical mathematics education is to enhance student agency, stu-
dents should remain a paramount concern in selecting the theme of the project,
designing it, and collecting and analyzing data. One important feature of such a
project is to be context based and culturally relevant to the students. To serve critical
mathematics education in particular, it should incorporate reection on, with, and
through mathematics (Skovsmose, 2011).

7.5.2 Critical Reflection on Mathematical Practices

Skovsmose (2011) identied four mathematical practices that lend themselves to be

addressed by mathemacy: practices of the marginalized, practices of consumption,
practices of operation, and practices of construction. These practices can serve
mathemacy, both functionally and critically. The problems in the mathematics cur-
riculum overlap, to some extent, with the four domains of mathematical practices as
identied by Skovsmose. This overlap presents opportunities for teachers to engage
students in mathemacy to some degree. With the exception of practices of the mar-
ginalized, the other three types of practices are normally used in mathematics cur-
ricula and textbooks as contexts for mathematical problem tasks. I propose that
these problems be expanded to serve the critical dimension of mathemacy. For
example, a problem in statistics that involves representation and comparison of data
on salaries of groups of employees may lend itself to critical enhancement by pos-
ing additional questions, such as the following: Is the data fabricated or is it based
on a real contextual situation? How does the average salary and variation in the sala-
ries compare to other rich and poor countries? If the data is real, do the differences
in salaries between different groups (gender, type of job) exist? If they exist, can
they be justied and on what basis? Such critical development of the existing prob-
lem does not require much change in the infrastructure of the instructional design,
and it may contribute to the critical feature of mathemacy if it is adopted as an
instructional strategy that is used consistently and frequently in mathematics class-
rooms across different grade levels. I believe that posing and reecting on such criti-
cal dimensions of existing problems may contribute to students critical awareness,
if not critical consciousness, of the social realities of the community.
In conclusion, no one will contest the power of mathemacy in enhancing both the
functional and critical aspects of mathematics learning while providing highly
authentic interface between solving problems in the real world and in school math-
ematics. On the other hand, although inspirational for mathematics educators, math-
emacy in its pure idealistic form is very difcult to implement at the macro level, in
118 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

the current political and educational systems worldwide. This chapter has suggested
that teacher and student agency can be enhanced to allow teachers and students to
scale mathemacy within the realities of their schools. However, as far as in interfac-
ing problem solving in school mathematics and the real world, some features of
mathemacy have the potential to serve as objects to cross the boundary between
problem solving in school mathematics and the real world.

7.6 My Reflection on Critical Mathematics Education

My rst encounter with critical education was in the late 1990s when I came across
Paulo Freires work on what he then called liberatory and sometimes progressive
education. His ideas about the role of education in emancipating the oppressed were
shocking for me at rst to say the least. It came at a time when I, as a university
professor of education, was completely drawn to the academic nature of education
and its scientic jargon. It triggered in me the nostalgic memories of my early
youth when I secretly conceived of myself as a revolutionary, following the dream
of Che Guevar. The shock that gripped me as I read Freires ideas came from the
unusual weapon that Freire raised in the struggle for liberation from oppression:
education instead of a gun. To my mind, at least during my early youth, Guevara
was struggling to ultimately make people conscious of their reality in order to
change it. As I was reading Freires ideas on the pedagogy of the oppressed, I felt as
if the meaning of my professional world was about to be violently shaken. Here was
a remarkably peaceful man who was raising the weapon of education to struggle for
the emancipation of the oppressed and thus helping rebuild a bridge between my
early youth dreams and my current profession in life. My rst reading of Freire was
a source of revelation and inspiration. He inspired me that, after all, I had the hope
to turn my profession into a mission. At that time, and for personal and professional
reasons, I felt that I was not ready to follow that hope. I decided, for the time being,
to lock that hope in the vault of secret ideas. It was a relief to postpone the disturb-
ing thought of undertaking a professional transformation at that time.
In 2007 an opportunity presented itself to apply some of the Freires ideas in
TAMAM project, a school-based reform project in the Arab region (Chap. 4, Sect.
4.10, includes more details about TAMAM project). The rst cycle of TAMAM,
which continued for 2 years, followed an evolving design constructed around two
basic artifacts: collaborative need-based action research school projects and reec-
tive practice. The action research projects were to be designed by each school team
based on the actual school needs and problems. The reective practice took place at
three levels: individual level, team level, and semi-annual conferences of all TAMAM
participants. The TAMAM project was designed and implemented in a way reminis-
cent of Freires problem-posing pedagogy and its central concept, including simul-
taneous engagement with critical consciousness of the actual situation and with
action to change the situation. The three co-principal investigators had different
interpretations of the role of action research and reective practice, and I was the one
7.6 My Reection on Critical Mathematics Education 119

who, consciously or subconsciously, pushed for and practiced Freires interpreta-

tions of those concepts. For me, the outcome of the project was to be assessed in
terms of the transformation of all TAMAM participants attitudes and ability to
engage in critical understanding of their practices and actions to improve them. In
their project work, my university students came to the learning process with little
experiential learning, so in their course work they were engaged in the simulation of
reality rather than in experiencing it. On the other hand, TAMAM participants
brought with them to their learning in TAMAM a rich capital of actual experiences
which in many respects was richer than my experiences as a university professor.
The experience of the TAMAM project inuenced me in a profound way and
exhibited itself in a deep commitment to critical teacher education. The following
translated quotation from my chapter entitled TAMAM: A Road for Emancipation
from Previous Knowledge Towards Renewal in Jurdak (2014) describes the strength
of my commitment to a critical stance in teacher education:
In TAMAM, my role changed from a teacher to a critical learner. In this way, the TAMAM
experience was an act of emancipation from my previous knowledge which ceased to be
an authority that protects me from change to one that is subject to change through praxis
and questioning. My university teaching experience could not have impacted me in this
way. (Translated from Arabic by the author from Jurdak, 2014, p. 27).

In fact, my commitment to critical education made me opt out of the proposal for
the third renewal of TAMAM because the funders wanted a more efcient delivery
of TAMAM by focusing more directly on professional development, which I felt
was not aligned with my beliefs in critical teacher education.
My involvement in the theory and practice of critical mathematics education
came late in my career. Toward the end of the 1980s, I had developed some aware-
ness of the social and cultural concerns of mathematics education, primarily as a
result of the experiences I had as a mathematics education consultant in different
contexts in many Arab countries. This social and cultural awareness was reected in
two presentations: one in Budapest ICME, titled Religion and Language as Cultural
Carriers and Barriers in Mathematics Education (Jurdak, 1989), and an invited
lecture in Laval ICME, titled Mathematics in the Global Village, the Wedge and
the Filter (Jurdak, 1994). These two papers were not directly expressive of what
came to be known as critical mathematics education, being developed at that time.
My later work on equity and quality of mathematics education was more focused on
dealing with these issues at the global level. In all these studies, I mostly used the
tools of the cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), particularly Engestrms
activity system (Engestrm, 2001). I believe that both CHAT and critical mathemat-
ics education aim essentially at the transformation of the human condition but differ
in their ways of achieving that goal. While critical mathematics education builds on
Foucaults emphasis on exposing powers impact on social relationships, activity
theory puts more emphasis on Marxist dialectical processes in the system to achieve
both individual and system transformation.
Although I have little experience in the research or practice of critical mathematics
education, I hold an ambivalent view regarding it. I do value critical mathematics
education as a theory to make sense of mathematics at the social and political levels
120 7 Real-World Problem Solving From the Perspective of Critical Mathematics Education

of the real world; however, I see the need to move from critical mathematics education
as an ideology toward making it scalable in scope and intensity. Skovsmoses latest
book titled An Invitation to Critical Mathematics Education (2011) is an important
attempt to bring much-needed realism to critical mathematics education while estab-
lishing its mathematical, philosophical, and sociological foundations on solid grounds.

References

Engestrm, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualiza-

tion. Journal of Education & Work, 14(1), 133156.
Frankenstein, M. (1983). Critical mathematics education: An application of Paulo Freires episte-
mology. The Journal of Education, 165(4), 315339.
Freire, P. (1970/2013). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Bloomsbury.
Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed (R. R. Barr, Trans.).
New York: Continuum.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Westport, CT: Bergin&
Garvey.
Gutstein, E. (2006). Reading and writing the world with mathematics: Toward pedagogy for social
justice. New York: Routledge.
Gutstein, E. (2007). And thats just how it starts: Teaching mathematics and developing student
agency. The Teachers College Record, 109(2), 420448.
Jurdak, M.E. (1989). Religion and language as culture carriers and barriers in mathematics educa-
tion. In C. Kietel (Ed.), Mathematics, Education and Society (Science and Technology
Education, Document Series No. 35), (pp. 12-14). Paris: UNESCO.
Jurdak, M. E. (1994). Mathematics education in the global village. In D. Robitaille, D. Wheeler, &
C. Kieran (Eds.), Selected lectures from the 7th International Congress on Mathematical
Education (pp. 199210). Quebec: Laval University.
Jurdak, M. (2014). TAMAM: Voices from the field (in Arabic). Retrieved from http://tamamproject.
org/research/tamam-voices-from-the-eld/.
Skovsmose, O. (1994). Towards a philosophy of critical mathematics education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Skovsmose, O. (2011). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Vithal, R. (2003). In search of a pedagogy of conflict and dialogue for mathematics education.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Chapter 8
Real-World Problem Solving
from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

I view ethnomathematics as a research program

on epistemology and history, focusing on science
and mathematics, with obvious implications for education.
(DAmbrosio, 2001, p.67)
Ethnomathematics is a research programme of the way,
in which cultural groups understand, articulate and use the
concepts and practices which we describe as mathematical,
whether or not the cultural group has a concept of mathematics.
(Barton, 1996, p. 214).

The term ethnomathematics denotes a cluster of ideas that came into being in the
early 1980s to explore the interaction between two strange bedfellows at the time,
i.e., mathematics and culture. Ubiratan DAmbrosio is the best known of the three
early proponents of ethnomathematics, with the other two being Paulus Gerdes and
Marcia Ascher. Since its appearance as a form of scholarly discourse, ethnomathe-
matics has been the subject of debate in terms of its foundation, its relation to math-
ematics education, and its relation to critical mathematics education. Below, I attempt
to identify and summarize the salient issues that are the focus of the three debates.

8.1 Foundational Issues in Ethnomathematics

The foundational issues of ethnomathematics relate to its nature as a new scholarly

discourse on the one hand, and to the historical evolution in the proponents ideas
regarding the nature and purposes of ethnomathematics on the other. This chapter
does not engage in the philosophical and epistemological argumentation that has
been used in these debates but rather focuses on the foundational issues of ethno-
mathematics in relation to mathematics and culture. In this regard, the discussion is
informed by Bartons paper entitled Making Sense of Ethnomathematics:
Ethnomathematics Is Making Sense (1996) which was perhaps the rst comprehen-
sive paper to compare and contrast the foundational issues of ethnomathematics as
they appeared in the writings of the early proponents of ethnomathematics.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 121

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_8
122 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

The conceptions of the rst proponents of ethnomathematics evolved from a

focus on the study of mathematical practices of different cultural groups to a much
broader conception of ethnomathematics as a systematic body of knowledge
(Barton, 1996). For example, DAmbrosios (1986) earliest denition of ethno-
mathematics, given at ICME 5 in 1984, focused on the way different cultural groups
view mathematise (count, measure, relate, classify, and infer). DAmbrosio (1985)
broadened this denition to include a program of studying the origin and patterns of
reasoning in the practices of different cultural groups with the purpose of construct-
ing a systematic body of knowledge:
We are collecting examples and data on the practices of culturally differentiated groups
which are identiable as mathematical practices, hence ethnomathematics, and trying to
link these practices into a pattern of reasoning, a mode of thought. Using both cognitive
theory and cultural anthropology we hope to trace the origin of these practices. In this way
a systematic organization of these practices into a body of knowledge may follow (p. 47).

By 1994, DAmbrosio conceived of ethnomathematics as a research program to

study the codication which allows a cultural group to describe, manage, and
understand reality, history, and philosophy, not only in the study of mathematics
but in all domains (Barton, 1996, p. 208). However, DAmbrosio (2001) later
retracted from encompassing knowledgemaking in all elds to that of science
and mathematics: I view ethnomathematics as a research program on epistemol-
ogy and history, focusing on science and mathematics, with obvious implications
for education (p. 67).
As for Gerdes (1986), his initial conception of ethnomathematics centered on the
study of practices for the sake of recognizing hidden and frozen western mathemat-
ics in them. His conception then developed into a research program whose aim was
to transform, through mathematics education, a colonized culture into a modern,
independent one which uses world mathematics (1988). Later, Gerdes (1989) con-
ceived of ethnomathematics as a movement of active reclaiming of a mathematical
point of view as part of indigenous culture. This included generating new mathe-
matics from traditional sources and conventional mathematics combined. (Barton,
1996, p. 208).
Ascher and Ascher (1986) dened ethnomathematics as the study of the prac-
tices of non-literate peoples from a mathematical point of view. She studied those
practices initially because they were essential to the emergence of a philosophy of
western mathematics tting our times and our culture ( p. 140). Later, Ascher
(1991) broadened her narrow perspective of our culture to a more global multi-
cultural view of mathematics (p. 1). Similarly, she broadened her technical neutral
description of the cultures to be studied by ethnomathematics from non-literate
peoples to a more political stance which includes people who have generally been
excluded from discussions of mathematics(p. 1).
Building on DAmbrosios, Gerdes, and Aschers conceptions of ethnomathe-
matics, Barton (1996) offered the following denition of ethnomathematics:
Ethnomathematics is a research programme of the way, in which cultural groups under-
stand, articulate and use the concepts and practices which we describe as mathematical,
whether or not the cultural group has a concept of mathematics. (p. 214).
8.2 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Mathematics Education 123

The cultural conict associated with colonization formed one of the main
concerns of ethnomathematics, and in mathematics it focused on the cultural con-
ict between western mathematics and the mathematics that existed in colonial-
ized cultures. Therefore, ethnomathematics was more concerned with the political
dimension of this cultural conict than in its educational dimension. Within the
educational context, Bishop (1988), though not identied as an ethnomathemati-
cian, asserts that a students out-of-school contexts may be so different from the
context of the mathematics classroom so as to generate a cultural conict between
the school and out-of-school subcultures.
Based on the review of the foundational issues, I offer three general observations
relevant to later discussions in this chapter. First, if we are to understand Bartons
denition of ethnomathematics as an attempt to dene the commonality among the
conceptions of DAmbrosio, Gerdes, and Ascher, then the mathematical concepts
and practices of cultural groups constitute the core of all versions of ethnomathe-
matics, regardless of the variations in them. Second, all versions of ethnomathemat-
ics grew out of a study of the mathematical practices of cultural groups to more
encompassing research programs with different aims. Third, the three versions of
ethnomathematics vary in the role they play in mathematics education. Gerdes
viewed ethnomathematics as an emancipatory movement in mathematics education,
while DAmbrosio envisioned obvious implications of ethnomathematics for edu-
cation (DAmbrosio, 2001, p. 67). Asher, however, envisioned a role for ethno-
mathematics in mathematics itself rather than in mathematics education.

8.2 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Mathematics Education

Between 2002 and 2004 a debate was triggered by an article by Rowlands and
Carson (2002) in the Educational Studies of Mathematics journal in which they
question the place of ethnomathematics in the teaching of formal, academic math-
ematics, based on their critical review of ethnomathematics literature. This article
prompted a comment from Adam, Alangui, and Barton (2003) in the same journal,
which in turn prompted a response from Rowlands and Carson (2004) in that jour-
nal. Both sides engaged in philosophical, epistemological, anthropological, and
mathematical argumentation regarding the salient foundational issues of ethno-
mathematics, briey reviewed in Sect. 8.1 of this chapter. In this section, the focus
is not on the authors argumentation in the debate, but rather on the educational
implications of this argumentation.
The debate centered on the role and implications of ethnomathematics in the
mathematics curriculum. Rowlands and Carson (2002) assert from their critical
review of ethnomathematics literature that It would seem most likely that formal,
academic mathematics would not exist in a curriculum informed by ethnomathemat-
ics (p. 91). Adam et al. (2003) comment that the idea that something called ethno-
mathematics should replace mathematics in formal education is very much a straw
manwe are not aware of this idea being seriously developed in contemporary
124 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

literature (p. 330), and their proposal is that ethnomathematics should be taken into
account when preparing learning situations for academic mathematics. Rowlands
and Carson (2002) assert that ethnomathematics would make a valuable contribution
to the curriculum if it demonstrates how mathematical ideas grow out of the needs of
various peoples in order to help students recognize both the universal nature of
human ingenuity and the remarkable diversity of its many forms of expression
(p. 92). Adam et al. (2003) note in response that the concept that mathematics may
be imbued with an ethnomathematical perspective is a common view of most of
those working in ethnomathematics, and that the question of whether such a per-
spective helps fulll the aims of conventional mathematics education is no longer an
ideological but rather an open empirical question. On the question of whether ethno-
mathematics should be taken into account when preparing learning situations,
Rowlands and Carson (2002) assert that mathematics can be taught effectively and
meaningfully without relating it to culture or to the individual student otherwise
there can be no practicing mathematicians in the formal, academic sense (p. 95).
Adam et al.s (2003) response is that there are different approaches for ethnomathe-
matics to imbue the mathematics curriculum and they suggest four: mathematics in
a meaningful context, ethnomathematics as a particular content distinct from that
used in most schools, ethnomathematics as a stage in the progression of mathemati-
cal thinking that a child goes through during his/her mathematics education, and the
mathematical concept that all classrooms are situated in a cultural context. They
conclude by asserting that:
They favor an integration of the mathematical concepts and practices originating in the
learners culture with those of conventional, formal academic mathematics. The mathemat-
ical experiences from the learners culture are used to understand how mathematical ideas
are formulated and applied. This general mathematical knowledge is then used to introduce
conventional mathematics in such a way that it is better understood, its power, beauty and
utility are better appreciated, and its relationship to familiar practices and concepts made
explicit. In other words, a curriculum of this type allows learners to become aware of
how people mathematise and use this awareness to learn about a more encompassing
mathematics. (p. 332).

In their response to Adam et al.s comment, Rowlands and Carson (2004) reaf-
rm their philosophical/ideological position but report that they are in substantial
agreement with Adam et al. (2003) on two points:
1. By engaging in ethnomathematics, it becomes possible to create a discourse that
engages all learners in a mathematical conversation, and ensures that children
from indigenous and traditional cultures will be in a position to bring important
resources and ideas to that conversation.
2. Ethnomathematics engages the teacher in a side of the mathematical conversa-
tion that opens up a route of access to the childs own unique modes of thought,
both personal and cultural. (p. 336).
It seems that the ideological/philosophical debate on the role of ethnomathemat-
ics in mathematics education has since then subsided. A sense of realism
has gradually seasoned ethnomathematics educational research and practice.
8.2 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Mathematics Education 125

Ethnomathematics research, as part of the cultural, social, and political dimensions

of mathematics education is gradually entering the mainstream of mathematics edu-
cation research. This can be seen from the growing role of those dimensions in the
scientic program of the International Congress of Mathematics Education (ICME)
from the Fifth Day Special Programme on mathematics, Education, and Society
at the 6th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Budapest, 1988.
Another indication is the growing research on the implications of mathematical
practices, particularly in the contexts of everyday life, the workplace, and indige-
nous cultures, to mathematics education.
Among other things, this debate shows that at least two ideas of ethnomathemat-
ics will continue to be integral parts of mathematics education: (1) the links between
mathematics and culture open new horizons for enhancing the quality and relevance
of mathematics learning; (2) the mathematical practices of different cultural groups,
which seem to be the core of all versions of ethnomathematics, are the natural
domains and concrete vehicles for connecting cultural resources and values with
mathematics learning.
Currently, the discussion has turned to the practical ways of incorporating ethno-
mathematical practices in school mathematics, a major concern of ethnomathemati-
cal mathematics educators. Since the mathematics in ethnomathematical practices is
hidden, the challenge of transforming it into educational practice is that there are
different purposes and ways of uncovering and of adapting it to become educa-
tional practice. Two models are suggested for transforming ethnomathematical
practices into mathematics educational practices; the rst by Adam (2004) and Begg
(2001) and the second by Dickenson-Jones (2008). I present below only the model
by Dickenson-Jones because rst it is the more recent, and second it builds on and
extends Adam and Beggs model. It should be noted here that although these two
models were developed in the context of indigenous cultural practices in Australia
and New Zealand, they can be applied to all ethnomathematical practices.
Dickenson-Jones (2008) suggests a 5-mode model for transforming indigenous
ethnomathematical practices into mathematical education practices. The ve modes
differ in terms of student engagement in the ethnomathematical practice, in the use
of conventional mathematics in studying the ethnomathematical practice, and in the
opportunity given to students to engage in different ways of knowing. In the dis-
junction mode of transformation, students do not need to engage with the cultural
practice. Students are not required to engage with different ways of knowing the
western classroom mathematics in order to achieve the intended outcomes. (p. 40).
In the translation mode, students interpret aspects of the cultural practice in terms
of western classroom mathematics but are not involved in different ways of know-
ing. In the integration mode, students engage in the cultural practice through theo-
retical comparisons with western classroom mathematics. In the correlation mode,
students engage in the cultural practice through concrete comparisons with western
classroom mathematics. In the union mode, students perform the indigenous cul-
tural practice in a similar way to the practice in its original context as opposed to
the western classroom mathematics (p. 42).
126 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

8.3 Relation of Ethnomathematics to Critical Mathematics

Education

Although they were developed during the same period, the relationship between
ethnomathematics and critical mathematics education (CME) seems to be ambiva-
lent. If we consider that critical mathematics education started with Frankenstein
(1983) and ethnomathematics with DAmbrosios (1986), then we can assume that
the two movements were developed in parallel during the same period. Not much
interaction between ethnomathematics and CME took place in the early years of
their development, although it was generally assumed then that the two belonged to
the same genre of the social and cultural aspects of mathematics education. Toward
the end of the twentieth century, philosophical and practical tensions started to sur-
face between the two.
Vithal and Skovsmoses writing (1997) is one of the earliest writings to bring
into the open the tensions between ethnomathematics and critical mathematics edu-
cation. Vithal and Skovsmose (1997) view ethnomathematics and critical mathe-
matics education as reactions to modernization theory which posited a relation
between, on the one hand, progress, liberalization and industrialization and, on the
other hand, technological development (including abroad upgrading of mathematics
education) (p. 132). Ethnomathematics is a reaction to the cultural imperialism
built into modernization theory, whereas critical education is a reaction from within
a highly technological society. A main concern for ethnomathematics is to identify
the culturally embedded mathematical competencies instead of importing west-
ern mathematics, whereas the main concern for critical mathematics education is a
critique of the assumption that industrialization is a means for social, economic, and
political development. According to Vithal and Skovsmose, even though their basic
concerns are similar, it is essential to develop a critique of both notions if we are to
develop a deeper understanding of their relation to progress, democracy and techno-
logical development. (p. 133).
Vithal and Skovsmoses (1997) critique of ethnomathematics falls into two cat-
egories: the problems associated with the implementation of ethnomathematics in
post-apartheid South Africa, on the one hand, and the theoretical assumptions of
ethnomathematics, on the other. The authors claim that within the South African
experience , the language of ethnomathematics, particularly its articulation of a
concern with culture in education, may appear too similar to the rhetoric of apart-
heid education, because in the South African context, cultural difference provided
the ideological foundation for apartheid, which served as the fundamental principle
for organizing all aspects of life.
The critique of Vithal and Skovsmose (1997) of ethnomathematics views the
assumptions of ethnomathematics from the perspective of critical mathematics edu-
cation. One of their critiques is that ethnomathematics does specify a relation between
culture and power. They hold the position that, by considering the implicit mathemat-
ics of a culture, ethnomathematics comes to participate in cultural conicts because
culture itself can include conicts. Their second critique is that ethnomathematics-
informed mathematics education paid too much attention to the students cultural
8.4 Ethnomathematical Practices and Mathematics Education 127

background compared to the students foreground, i.e., the set of opportunities that
the learners social context makes accessible to the learner to perceive as his or her
possibilities for the future (p. 147). Their third critique is that although ethnomath-
ematics provides a perspective on mathematics education, ethnomathematical litera-
ture did not provide a crucial description of an educational practice.
Five years after the publication of this critique of Vithal and Skovsmose (1997),
DAmbrosio (2001), in his introduction to the special ZDM issue on ethnomathe-
matics, seemed to infuse a critical stance in ethnomathematics in two ways. He rst
attempts to put emphasis on the students foreground by stating that it is also very
important to recognize that improving the opportunities for employment is a real
expectation that students and parents have of school. (p. 67). He then attempts to
accommodate, at least at the level of language, some of the concerns of critical
mathematics education as indicated in the following quotation:
To be a responsible consumer an individual must be able to deal, critically, with the optimi-
zation of the relation cost/benefit. To be able to take responsible decisions, through political
awareness and participation, the individual must understand consequences of his/her
options. Again, this requires analytical instruments, mostly in the form of models. (p. 68)
(Emphasis is mine).

Skovsmose (2011) seems to recognize the common concerns of CME in ethno-

mathematics. The following two quotations from his latest book support this state-
ment. It is common sense to talk about teaching and learning in different cultural
settings, and also to emphasize that the interpretation of any form of teaching and
learning has to be done with reference to the cultural setting in which it operates.(p.
19). However, it is also important to talk about teaching and learning in different
socio-economic contexts. (p. 20).

8.4 Ethnomathematical Practices and Mathematics Education

Mathematical practices that occur in culturally specic contexts constitute the core
of ethnomathematics. These mathematical practices are the objects of ethnomathe-
matical study whose aim is the illumination and extension of this knowledge; its
methods are to expand the ambit of what can be legitimately regarded as mathemat-
ics (Barton, 2004, p. 23). I shall call mathematical practices that occur in cultur-
ally specific contexts ethnomathematical practices. These ethnomathematical
practices may be used for mathematical, anthropological, historical, or educational
purposes. Obviously, a necessary condition for a culturally specic practice to be
ethnomathematical is for it to be mathematical. Barton (2004) addresses the ques-
tion of what is meant by mathematical, characterizing it as the knowledge that
should be systematized, should be formalized and should relate to quantity,
relation-ships, or space. (p. 23). Operationally this means that:
Practitioners should be able to discuss aspects of the system being considered, and hypoth-
esize and convince each other about aspects of the system being considered, when they are
physically removed from the site of the practice. (p. 23)
128 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

The use of ethnomathematical practices for educational purposes poses the ques-
tion of the criteria for ethnomathematical practices to be an educational practice.
I suggest that an ethnomathematical practice is educational (1) if it has in its deni-
tion an educational orientation, or (2) if the researcher can demonstrate by action or
description, the potential of the practice to relate to learning and teaching of school
mathematics. For example, ethnomathematical practices used in situated cognition
studies have an educational orientation by their denition. A historical ethnomath-
ematical practice is potentially educational if its relation to learning and teaching
school mathematics can be demonstrated.
Educational ethnomathematical practices may come from different sources.
They may have the potential of serving educational purposes (Zaslavsky, 2002, for
example). Moreover, ethnomathematical practices that are used by situated cogni-
tion may qualify to be educational practices (Lave, 1988). Furthermore, ethnomath-
ematical practices of indigenous people may also serve learning and teaching school
mathematics (Dickenson-Jones, 2008). Also, historical ethnomathematical prac-
tices may serve educational purposes (Zaslavsky, 2002, for example).

8.5 Ethnomathematical Practices and Problem Solving

Ethnomathematical practices are not necessarily problem solving activities. In fact,

by their very nature, ethnomathematical practices , as they are enacted and practiced
by members of a specic culture, are routinized automated sequences of actions
which require little problem solving mental functioning. How then can ethnomath-
ematical practices be problematized to serve educational purposes? According to
Dickenson-Jones (2008), there are several ways to problematize ethnomathematical
practices.
One way to problematize an ethnomathematical practice is to ask for the math-
ematization of the practice. Dickenson-Jones (2008) describe an activity which
involves the Aboriginal cultural practice of throwing returning boomerangs and
which is a part of the curriculum of New South Wales Board of Education in
Australia. This activity requires students to perform throwing a returning boomer-
ang in order to model the mathematical dynamics of throwing a boomerang.
Accordingly, this activity illustrates the mode of correlation as it requires that stu-
dents perform the practice itself as well as experience concepts of western class-
room mathematics related to the aerodynamics of the ight of a returning
boomerang. (p. 47). Thus, the mathematization of throwing returning boomerangs,
a habitual practice in this culture, helped transform the practice into a problem.
A second way to problematize an ethnomathematical practice is to use the prac-
tice to cause a breakdown in the normal behaviors of the students. This method will
be illustrated by the example previously recounted from Jurdak (2006). As noted,
in this study, the task that was given to students in their nal year of secondary
education was a breakdown in their normal behaviors. Though the students had
8.6 Ethnomathematics as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School 129

experience in solving problems involving the volume of a cylinder, they did not
have experience in actually constructing cylinders with given specications. Thus,
the students were at a loss as to how the mathematical solution would help in con-
structing the required cylinder. This breakdown in their normal behavior posed the
problem of constructing three dimensional objects of specied dimensions from
two-dimensional objects. The use of an ethnomathematical practice helped prob-
lematize a situation which the students thought was a routine exercise.
A third way to problematize an ethnomathematical practice is to use the ethno-
mathematical practice in a different context. This method will be illustrated by an
example from Jurdak and Shahin (1999). The study examined the computational
strategies of ten young street vendors in Beirut by describing, comparing, and ana-
lyzing the computational strategies used in solving three types of problems in two
settings: transactions in the workplace, word problems, and computation exercises
in a school-like setting. Some of the vendors who were successful in using error-
free, informal, mental computational strategies tried to use the same strategies in the
computation exercises in a school-like setting. As a consequence, many subjects
lost the ability to monitor their performance and to judge the reasonableness of their
responses, which resulted in erroneous solutions to the problems.

8.6 Ethnomathematics as an Interface Between

Problem Solving in School Mathematics
and in the Real World

The inclusion of ethnomathematics in the school curriculum entails signicant

changes in its goals, approaches, and content. The inclusion of ethnomathematics
in school mathematics is a matter that requires, among other things, the existence
of educational policies which authorize and dene the role of culture, particularly
local subcultures, in the school curriculum, including mathematics. However, the
role of culture in the school curriculum is politically contentious, particularly in
multicultural communities. A multicultural curriculum raises such issues as the
kind and degree of representation of different cultures and the possible impact of
such a curriculum on the social and national cohesion of the country. On the other
hand, the inclusion of ethnomathematics in school mathematics raises points of its
own. Mathematics is generally perceived as contributing to progress through its
role in science and technology, and the inclusion of ethnomathematics in school
mathematics is sometimes perceived (admittedly erroneously from the ethnomath-
ematics perspective) as a method that engages students in the mathematical prac-
tices of old cultures at the expense of the mathematics that will provide them with
the opportunities to succeed in modern economy. This does not mean that there are
no mathematics curricula that contain ethnomathematical practices. It seems that
attention is increasingly given to ethnomathematics in school mathematics in
130 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

countries with indigenous cultures such as New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, and
Australia, and in programs in countries with concerns for equity and social justice,
such as the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (USA) and the National
Curriculum (UK).
In Chap. 4, it is argued that ethnomathematics is a boundary object that can be
structured to enable students to cross the boundary between real-world and school-
mathematics problem solving. This section explores possible instructional designs
which serve as ethnomathematical mediating artifacts to cross the boundary between
real-world and school-mathematics problem solving.

8.6.1 Problematization of Ethnomathematical Practices

Based on the assumption that ethnomathematics is a part of the school curriculum,

the problematization of ethnomathematical practices may serve as a boundary
object between problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world.
In Sect. 8.5, a number of ways were suggested to problematize indigenous,
everyday or workplace valued habitual cultural practices by transforming them into
problematic situations that lend themselves to solution by school mathematics.
Problematization of ethnomathematical practices has the potential of interpretive
exibility since, it is interpreted as a habitual practice in the culture to which it
belongs, and it is also interpreted, as a problem situation amenable to being
addressed through the use of school mathematics.

8.6.2 Exploration of Historical Culturally Specific Problems

Historical ethnomathematical practices may serve as powerful boundary objects

between problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world. Zaslavsky
(2002) pioneered the use of historical ethnomathematical practices in school math-
ematics. The power of historical ethnomathematical practices is that they provide
opportunities for students to experience the mathematical problem solving of school
mathematics but in a different historical context. As such, historical ethnomathemat-
ical practices have the interpretive exibility necessary for any boundary object: for
one thing, they may be interpreted as problems that were faced and solved by people
at certain historical times, and, for another, they are compared to and interpreted in
the school mathematics. Historical ethnomathematical practices, if specic to the
students culture, may have the added value of becoming tools of acculturation in
their own culture. However, historical ethnomathematical practices which belong to
cultures other than that of the students may serve the aim of the unity of mathemati-
cal concerns across different cultures. The analysis of historical ethnomathematical
problem solving practices from the perspective of todays mathematics can be scaled
depending on the resources and constraints of the instructional setting. They can
consist of a systematic program or occasional enrichment activities.
8.7 My Narrative About Ethnomathematics 131

8.6.3 Student Ethnomathematical Research Project

Ethnomathematical research refers to the process of observing, identifying, and

analyzing ethnomathematical practices from the perspective of mathematics today.
In instructional settings, ethnomathematical research may take the form of a group
project by which students engage in observing, identifying, and analyzing culturally
specic ethnomathematical practices which are accessible to them. The ensuing
product will take the form of a project report in which the students describe the
methodology they followed and analyze the identied ethnomathematical practices
from the perspective of school mathematics.
The ethnomathematical research project may serve as powerful boundary object
that can interface problem solving in school and in the real world of observable
cultural practices. Discovering the hidden mathematics in the observed ethnomath-
ematical practice is by itself a problem solving activity. It requires, among other
things, the competency to discover, identify, and translate human mathematical
behavior into mathematical discourse. It also provides opportunities for students to
experience mathematical knowledge through the lens of empirical observation,
which contrasts with the formal deductive methods of school mathematics. In addi-
tion it provides opportunities for students to integrate different competencies, such
as group work, observation, analysis, and writing.
In summary, the contribution of ethnomathematics to mathematics education is
vital as far as its illumination of the cultural value of linking mathematics to culture
and of the educational value of ethnomathematical practices in the learning and
teaching of mathematics. To make this contribution sustainable, ethnomathematics
needs to be recognized as an aspect of school mathematics. The contribution of
ethnomathematics to teaching real-world problem solving has to be further explored
and tested. This chapter suggests three instructional designs which interface school
and real-world problem solving: problematization of ethnomathematical practices,
exploration of historical culturally specic problems, and student ethnomathemati-
cal research projects.

8.7 My Narrative About Ethnomathematics

My encounter with ethnomathematics came shortly after the completion of my

Ph.D. in 1973 and my joining the American University of Beirut (AUB) as a faculty
member in the Education Department and in its Science and Mathematics Education
Center (SMEC). This brought me face to face with the actual world of policy mak-
ers, schools, teachers, and students. Through an institutional arrangement between
the American University of Beirut and the Ministries of Education in Sudan and
Saudi Arabia, the Science and Mathematics Education Centre was charged with
implementing science and mathematics curriculum development in those two coun-
tries. I assumed the leadership role in the mathematics education projects in Sudan
132 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

and Saudi Arabia. What follows reects my mathematics education experiences in

the two culturally different countries, Saudi Arabia and Sudan.
Saudi Arabia is an oil-rich kingdom with vast nancial resources and very ambi-
tious plans for social development but within the strict interpretation of Islam. The
education system in Saudi Arabia grew out of religious community schools to
become a vast public education system whose schools were equipped with modern
facilities and mostly expatriate teachers from other Arab countries, mainly from
Egypt. Culturally, Saudi Arabia is an ethnically, linguistically, and religiously
homogeneous Muslim society. In their educational policy documents, although they
frame the educational values of the country within those of Islam, they stress the
importance of mathematics to science and technology and hence to the economic
development of the country. Our team worked with Saudi teams for more than ve
years and produced state-of-the-art mathematics textbooks for grades 112. There
was a complete separation between mathematics and the Islamic culture, although
the Muslim contribution to mathematics is universally recognized. At that time it
occurred to me to include a text from the Holy Quran in the grade 4 textbook as a
way to build awareness of mathematics in their culture. The selected text is probably
the most sophisticated mathematics text that ever existed in a book of the great
religions. The text stipulated to whom, how, and in what ratio the inheritance should
be distributed according to the Holy Quran (Jurdak, 1999). It is so detailed and
comprehensive to the point that it is used till now as part of the Islamic laws of
inheritance. Obviously this text involves complex use of fractions, and hence I per-
ceived it as a culturally relevant source for engaging students in problem solving.
However, our Saudi colleagues did not look favorably at what I thought was a
unique opportunity for students to connect with their culture, mainly because the
sacred text may be desecrated as students carry their textbooks around. It showed
me that introducing culture to mathematic education is not a direct simple act but
rather a complex matter of multiple meanings.
The Sudanese context provided a different cultural and educational experience
for me. Sudan is (was) an ethnically, linguistically, and religiously diverse society.
It was also a vast, poor agrarian republic with limited nancial resources to meet its
development needs. The education system in Sudan was modelled in its educational
approach after that of Britain, which had ruled the country before the fties. The
Sudanese schools were lacking in facilities and equipment but were in good supply
of well-prepared Sudanese teachers, thanks to a unique tradition in teacher educa-
tion. In the 1930s, Grifths, one of the HMI inspectors of education, decided to
establish an institution to prepare teachers for rural areas, and so he set up an insti-
tute of education, calling it Bakht-Al-Rida after the name of the nearest little vil-
lage. On the banks of Nile, he built a campus with minimal facilities, similar to what
one would expect in the rural areas of Sudan. The recruited student teachers were
required to live on campus and lead a combined life of work and education in this
minimalist environment. The student teachers as a group were expected to develop,
test, and debate the school curriculum, lesson by lesson. Grifths documented the
establishment of Bakht-Al-Rida and his experiences there in a book, now out of
print, under the title An Experiment in Education (1953).Our team had the chance
References 133

to work with teams of Sudanese mathematics educators and to visit schools and
meet with teachers in both Saudi Arabia and Sudan. My experience in Sudan broad-
ened my cultural perspective of education in general and mathematics education in
particular. Although the Sudanese classrooms were poorly equipped and quite
crowded, the teaching and learning of mathematics was lively, active, and culturally
relevant. Many objects from the local environments were used to support the learn-
ing of mathematics. Also some community mathematical practices served the class-
room instruction and learning. Since initiated and developed by one of HMI
inspectors of education, Bakht-Al-Rida Institute of education was a unique experi-
ment which embodied the British tradition of teacher-based education (curriculum
and instruction are built around the teacher), yet it adopted the content and practices
of the local culture. The Bakht-Al-Rida model caught the attention of the World
Bank and the UN as a viable model for West African countries.
The socioeconomic and cultural contrast between Saudi Arabia and Sudan sharp-
ened my awareness of the complexity of how and to what extent the socioeconomic
and cultural contexts mediate student mathematics learning. It heralded my shift
towards a growing awareness of the social and cultural concerns of mathematics
education.
The turning point in my career was my participation the Fifth Day Special
Programme on Mathematics, Education, and Society at the 6th International
Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME). My presentation entitled Religion
and Language as Cultural Carriers and Barriers in Mathematics Education (Jurdak,
1989) constituted my initiation into the community of sociocultural mathematics
educators. The presentation, though closer to Bishops concept of cultural conict
(1988) than ethnomathematics, raised fresh but controversial questions about the
role of religion and language in mathematics education. One of the rst studies in
which I used an ethnomathematics framework was the study on the strategies of the
group of young street vendors in Beirut referred to earlier (Jurdak & Shahin, 1999).
The strategies used by vendors were explained in terms of mathematical practices
which had been generated through a process of cultural dynamics and learned in a
more casual and less formal way than school mathematics. My resulting commit-
ment to the sociocultural dimension of mathematics education, not necessarily in
the form of ethnomathematics, stands rm and has never weakened.

References

Adam, S. (2004). Ethnomathematical ideas in the curriculum. Mathematics Education Research

Journal, 16(2), 4968.
Adam, S., Alangui, W., & Barton, B. (2003). A comment on: Rowlands & Carson Where would
formal, academic mathematics stand in a curriculum informed by ethnomathematics? A critical
review. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 327.
Ascher, M. (1991). Ethnomathematics: A multicultural view of mathematical ideas. New York:
Brooks/Cole.
Ascher, M., & Ascher, R. (1986). Ethnomathematics. History of Science, 24, 125144.
134 8 Real-World Problem Solving from the Perspective of Ethnomathematics

Barton, B. (1996). Making sense of ethnomathematics: Ethnomathematics is making sense.

Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31(1), 201.
Barton, B. (2004). Mathematics and mathematical practices: Where to draw the line? For the
Learning of Mathematics, 24(1), 2224.
Begg, A. (2001). Ethnomathematics: Why and what else? ZDM, 33(3), 7174.
Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematical enculturation. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
D Ambrosio, U. (1985). Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of mathe-
matics. For The Learning of Mathematics, 5(1), 4448.
DAmbrosio, U. (2001). General remarks on ethnomathematics. ZDM, 33(3), 6769.
DAmbrosio, U. (1986). Socio-cultural bases for mathematical education. In M. Carss (Ed.),
Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress on Mathematical Education. Boston:
Birkhuser.
Dickenson-Jones, A. (2008). Transforming ethnomathematical ideas in western mathematics cur-
riculum texts. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 3253.
Frankenstein, M. (1983). Critical mathematics education: An application of Paulo Freires episte-
mology. The Journal of Education, 165(4), 315339.
Gerdes, P. (1986). How to recognise hidden geometrical thinking? A contribution to the develop-
ment of anthropological mathematics. For The Learning of Mathematics, 6(2), 1012.
Gerdes, P. (1988). On possible uses of traditional Angolan sand drawings in the mathematics class-
room. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19(1), 322.
Gerdes, P. (1989). The use of ethnomathematics in the classroom. Proceedings of Politics of
Mathematics Education Conference, NECC Mathematics Commission, University of Western
Cape (pp. 2636).
Grifths, V. (1953). An experiment in education. London: Longmans.
Jurdak, M. E. (1989). Religion and language as culture carriers and barriers in mathematics educa-
tion. In C. Kietel (Ed.), Mathematics, education and society (Science and Technology
Education, Document Series No. 35) (pp. 1214). Paris: UNESCO.
Jurdak, M. (1999). The role of values in mathematics education. Humanistic Mathematics Network
Journal, 21, 3945.
Jurdak, M. (2006). Contrasting perspectives and performance of high school students on problem
solving in real world, situated, and school contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3),
283301.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (1999). An ethnographic study of the computational strategies of a group
of young street vendors in Beirut. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 155172.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. New York,
NY: Cambridge University Press.
Rowlands, S., & Carson, R. (2002). Where would formal, academic mathematics stand in a cur-
riculum informed by ethnomathematics? A critical review of ethnomathematics. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 50(1), 79102.
Rowlands, S., & Carson, R. (2004). Our response to Adam, Alangui and Bartons A comment on
Rowlands & Carson Where would formal, academic mathematics stand in a curriculum
informed by ethnomathematics? A critical review'''. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
56(2), 329342.
Skovsmose, O. (2011). An invitation to critical mathematics education. Rotterdam, The
Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Vithal, R., & Skovsmose, O. (1997). The end of innocence: A critique of Ethnomathematics.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(2), 131157.
Zaslavsky, C. (2002). Exploring world cultures in math class. Educational Leadership, 60(2),
6669.
 Part III
The Contexts
Chapter 9
Workplace as a Context for Real-World
Problem Solving

mathematical understanding is only part of a complex

interconnected set of conceptual resources on which workers
have to draw as they engage in often complex and substantial
activity which builds on, and involves, other workplace
colleagues knowledge, skills and understanding.
(Wake, 2014, p.278)

There is no single definition for the term work or workplace. FitzSimons (2014)
describes work as a human activity to produce material or intellectual goods or
services for humans and their environment, local to global and beyond (p. 293).
The organization of work may take diverse forms, such as single traders, businesses
run by single owners, companies, or parts of large multinational operations. In
todays world, the workplace can be a physical or virtual location.

9.1 Contrasting Practices in the School and the Workplace

Although there is general agreement that the school and the workplace are different
in many ways, researchers articulate the nature and source of such differences in
various ways. This section identifies and characterizes the main differences between
the school, as a general educational institution, and the workplace, at the individual
as well as the collective level.
Both learning at school and participating in the workplace are two types of pur-
poseful human activities (Leontev, 1981) in which the actions toward realizing
their purposes are mediated by the use of cultural artifacts. However, the two activi-
ties differ in the identity of the person doing the activity (subject), the nature of the
artifacts used, and the object, and consequently, the outcome of the two activities.
The upper triangle of Fig. 9.1 represents the individual activity of learning school
mathematics, and the upper triangle of Fig. 9.2 the individual activity at the work-
place. A primary difference is that the subject at school assumes the identity of a
learner whose presence there is the result of a tacit social contract, which implies
that learning is a fundamental societal and individual need that entails implicit obli-
gations and expectations on the part of society (state) and family. On the other hand,

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 137

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_9
138 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

Mediating artifacts ( mathematic &

symbolic tools )

Subjects (Students ) Object (Learning mathematics )

Rules (School polices Community (Teacher Division of labor (Teacher

and socialnorms) and class mates) and class mates)

Fig. 9.1 Structure of activity system of learning school mathematics

Mediating artifacts (Math,

technological &semiotic tools)

Subjects (Workers)
Object (Production of
goods and services)

Rules (Work rules, Community (Owners, Division of labor (Stipulated

laws, & professional Norms) managers, & workers) by owners and managers)

Fig. 9.2 Structure of activity system of generic workplace

the subject in the workplace is a worker who is an adult, hired to do a specific job at
a certain site during a certain period, according to a contract between the employee
and the employer. In school learning activity, the object is learning mathematics and
the outcome of this activity is objectified in mathematical knowledge, competen-
cies, and dispositions; while in the workplace, the object of the activity is the pro-
duction of physical and intellectual goods and services. A third difference is that,
the learning activity in school is mediated by symbolic and material artifacts, the
most important of which is language and mathematics, whereas the workplace
activity is mediated by technological and semiotic artifacts.
9.1 Contrasting Practices in the School and the Workplace 139

In any activity, the subject undertakes the activity as a member of a community

of practice engaged in a larger collective activity represented by an activity system
(Engestrm, 1987). The activity system represents a purposeful collective activity
in which a subject (or subjects) is engaged in attaining an object shared by a com-
munity, using mediating artifacts, where responsibilities are assigned collectively
among members of the community (division of labor) according to policies within
the social cultural context (rules). The introduction of a community of practice
necessitates the presence of a tacit or explicit way of distribution of labor among
members of the community (division of labor) as well as rules to govern the imple-
mentation of the collective activity (rules), some of which pertain to the collective
activity itself while others relate to social norms, laws, and regulations in the broader
social-cultural context in which the activity is taking place.
Figure 9.1 is a schematic diagram of the school-mathematics learning activity
system. In this activity system, the community consists of students and teachers; what
makes them a community of practice is that they share the same object. On the other
hand, the workplace community consists of workers, managers and owners of the
workplace. The workplace community tends to rely on artifacts and signs to help
them reduce the cognitive load (understanding) in their day-to-day practices (Wake,
2014), but in schools, teachers (not necessarily students) aim at maximizing the cog-
nitive load to enhance student learning. In the school activity system, division of
labor is normally done by teachers, and by managers and owners in the workplace
activity system. The rules in the school system consist of school rules and regulations
as well as social norms and cultural traditions; however, the rules in the workplace
include the workplace rules, professional standards and rules (unions and syndicates),
and legal rules, such as rules that pertain to licensing, safety, and work conditions.
The nature and functions of mathematical practice in the school and the work-
place exhibit more differences than similarities. Based on a comprehensive survey
of the literature, Wake (2014) identified the basic differences between mathemati-
cal practices in school and in the workplace. One difference is that in school, the
object is to make mathematical processes explicit, whereas in the workplace, math-
ematics is black-boxed (Williams & Wake, 2007) in the sense that mathematical
processes are implicit and hidden in technological devices. In the workplace,
explicit engagement with mathematics occurs at breakdown moments, and the
mathematical understanding required to explain such breakdowns is only part of
the conceptual resources on which workers have to draw as they engage in often
complex and substantial activity which builds on, and involves, other workplace
colleagues knowledge, skills and understanding (Wake, 2014, p. 278). On the
other hand, the explanations of conventions and workplace idiosyncrasies in both
representation and methods of analysis present challenges to school mathematics
and thus may provoke problem solving and modeling processes (Wake, 2014).
Wake also found that, in school, relatively advanced mathematics is imposed on
contrived simplified situations, whereas workplace activity with mathematics
often relies on relatively simple mathematics embedded in complex situations
(Steen, 1990). Finally, and according to FitzSimons (2014), school mathematics
is characterized as a vertical discourse which refers to theoretical and general-
ized knowledge with strong boundaries between itself and other disciplines.
140 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

On the other hand, workplace mathematics is characterized as a horizontal

discourse which refers to contextual knowledge that is generally weakly classified
and submerged within the goals and objectives of the job.

9.2 Contrasting Problem Solving in the School

and in the Workplace

Problem solving in the school and the workplace differ in their object and motive for
using problem solving, the nature of needed mathematical literacy, and their con-
ceptions of the relationship between mathematics and real-world situations. As far
as object is concerned, problem solving in school mathematics is looked at as an
indispensable ingredient of learning mathematics; in the workplace, however, prob-
lem solving is viewed as something that is not desirable and hence should be avoided
in the process of production. The reason for this difference is that problems in the
production process arise from breakdown or discontinuity in the process and
are viewed as obstacles, whereas problems in school mathematics normally arise
from breakdown or discontinuity in the student knowledge and are viewed as
opportunities for learning mathematics.
Problem solving in the school and the workplace has different motives. In school
mathematics, problem solving is motivated and based on mathematics to a large
extent. In the workplace, problem solving is a collaborative group activity in which
mathematics plays a minor role:
mathematical understanding is only part of a complex interconnected set of conceptual
resources on which workers have to draw as they engage in often complex and substantial
activity which builds on, and involves, other workplace colleagues knowledge, skills and
understanding. (Wake, 2014, p. 278)

Another difference between problem solving in the school and the workplace lies
in the kind of mathematical literacy needed for each. In school, the mathematical
literacy needed and targeted for problems puts heavy emphasis on mathematics in a
variety of contexts, and in most cases it approaches the International Programme for
Student Assessment (PISAs) definition of mathematical literacy as:
an individuals capacities to formulate, employ, and interpret mathematics in a variety of
contexts. It includes reasoning mathematically and using mathematical concepts, proce-
dures, facts, and tools to describe, explain, and predict phenomena (OECD, 2010, p. 4).

In the workplace, the literacy needed for problem solving does not normally go
beyond reading and writing mathematical information in line with the adult
numeracy as defined by the Project for the International Assessment of Adult
Competencies (PIAAC):
Numeracy is the ability to access, use, interpret, and communicate mathematical informa-
tion and ideas, in order to engage in and manage the mathematical demands of a range of
situations in adult life (PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group, 2009, p. 21).
9.3 Interfacing School and Workplace 141

Finally, while in school mathematics, complex situations are simplified by

removing nuisances that may interfere with the use of some intended complex
mathematics, problem solving in the workplace involves simple mathematics in a
complex situation. In other words, the ultimate concern of workplace problem solv-
ing is the situation itself, regardless of its complexity, but the ultimate concern of
school problem solving is mathematics itself, regardless of the reality of the situa-
tion in which the problem is couched.

9.3 Interfacing School and Workplace

There is general agreement that general education schooling and the workplace are
two different activity systems. However, there is a disagreement in conceptualizing
the modalities through which the workplace and the school activity systems can be
interfaced. In the literature there are two competing alternative conceptualizations
of interfacing the workplace and the school: boundary crossing and identity making/
remaking. It should be noted that both conceptualizations start from the theoretical
framework of Cultural Historical Theory (CHAT).

9.3.1 Boundary Crossing

Akkerman and Bakker (2011) define a boundary as:

a sociocultural difference leading to discontinuity in action or interaction. Boundaries
simultaneously suggest a sameness and continuity in the sense that within discontinuity two
or more sites are relevant to one another in a particular way (p. 133).

For example, not being able to use school-taught knowledge in the workplace is
an example of discontinuity. To establish or restore continuity in action or interac-
tion, individuals and groups need to make efforts to cross the boundary between the
two social worlds by using learning mechanisms at the boundary, which essentially
aim at appropriating hybrid meanings of boundary objects. Akkerman and Bakker
(2011) identify, among other things, four mechanisms of learning at the boundary,
which they label as identification, coordination, reflection, and transformation. An
example of a boundary object used in Bakker and Akkerman (2014) is a report of a
students project of the previous school year, comparing a new machine for measur-
ing a concentration of a chemical substance with the old, reliable machine. The
students project report is a boundary object because it serves different functions in
different communities: the end product of a students project, at work in a hospital,
where the results were useful to the laboratory (whether the new machine was reli-
able and stable enough), and it was graded at school, as part of the students diploma
requirements (p. 228).
142 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

9.3.2 Subjectification

Unlike Akkerman and Bakker (2011), who use the third generation of activity the-
ory of interconnected activity systems (Engestrm, 2001) to rationalize boundary
crossing between different but interacting social worlds, Roth (2014) uses the foun-
dational concept of individual activity to suggest the category of personality as sug-
gested by Leontev (1978) in order to explain the individual integration of learning
in two different social worlds. Roths thesis is based on two theoretical categories:
the idea of the subject as agent in the activity system and the idea of subjectification
which involves:
a process by means of which the individual person continuously changes: As the produc-
tive subject of labor, the person becomes more knowledgeable and skilled and, as the
patient of activity, the person is subject(ed) to the activity and the societal relations that
come with it. A person undergoes subjectification in each and every activity where he/she
participates in the course of the day, week, or month (Roth, 2014, p. 179)

Although Roth (2014) and Bakker and Akkerman (2014) start from activity the-
ory, they develop divergent explanations of integrating learning in different activity
systems. Roth posits that participating in a specific activity means that the person is
differently constituted as subject in each activity system through the process of
subjectification. On the other hand, Bakker and Akkerman theorize that participat-
ing in an activity in a different activity system means that this same person is con-
ceptually a different subject engaging in different practicesa situation which
requires crossing the boundary between the two different activity systems. In other
words, according to Roth, the identity of an individual is made and remade as activ-
ity is enacted and when individuals participate in multiple activity systems (Roth,
Leeb, & Hsu, 2009).

9.4 The Workplace Context as an Interface

Between Problem Solving in School Mathematics
and in the Real World

Between boundary crossing (Bakker & Akkerman, 2014) and subjectification

(Roth, 2014), I adopt the former as a way for interfacing problem solving in the
school and workplace. The reason for my choice is that the intention in this chapter
is to make school-mathematics students conscious of the potential of the workplace
to provide them with opportunities for real-world problem solving and not make
them skillful in workplace practices. In other words, the intention is not to enable
students to assume the identity of a workplace worker, i.e., be citizens of the
workplace, but rather to cross the boundary between the school and the workplace
in order to visit the latter for the purpose of seeking opportunities for real-world
problem solving.
For the purpose of crossing the boundary between the school and the workplace,
this chapter suggests four boundary objects which, at the tactical level, serve Wakes
9.4 The Workplace Context as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School 143

(2014) strategic goal of blending mathematical content, mathematical competen-

cies, and context. The four boundary objects are: work place routines as school
problems, Case-study student investigations of aspects of the workplace, joint
schoolworkplace focus groups, and shop technical skills courses.
In Chap. 4, it is argued that the workplace context is a boundary object that can
be structured to enable students to cross the boundary between real-world and
school-mathematics problem solving. This section explores possible instructional
designs which serve as workplace mediating artifacts to cross the boundary between
real-world and school-mathematics problem solving.

9.4.1 Workplace Routines as School Problems

According to Wake (2014), the main aim of engaging students in general education
in workplace mathematical practices is to enable them to make sense of these prac-
tices from their perspectives as school-mathematics students. There is strong evi-
dence that suggests that making sense of some of the routine mathematical practices
in the workplace may serve as a rich source for engaging students in real-world
problem solving.
I suggest here the idea, generally supported from an activity-theoretic perspec-
tive (Wake, 2014, for example), that practices routinized in one activity system, if
recontextualized in a different system, may cause a breakdown in the practices of
a different activity system. One consequence of this idea is that many routine prac-
tices in the workplace, if recontextualized in school mathematics, may cause break-
downs in the school context, and thus become challenging school-mathematics
problems. These breakdowns may be caused by discrepancies among the nodes
and their interactions among the two different activity systems. For example, a dis-
crepancy between the objects of school mathematics and the workplace may cause
a discontinuity in the practices of the participants of the system, thus creating an
obstacle that impedes their actions in the system. In what follows, three examples
from research will be presented to illustrate how the recontextualization of work-
place routine practices generated challenging school-mathematics problem due to a
discrepancy in the objects of the school and workplace (Jurdak & Shahin, 2001), a
discrepancy in the use of mathematical practice in the school and workplace (Wake,
2014), and the black-boxing of mathematics in the workplace as contrasted with
explicit use of mathematics in school (Williams & Wake, 2007).

Example 1: Object Discrepancy

Jurdak and Shahin (2001) presented an example in which a routine workplace task
caused a breakdown in student mathematical practices because of the discrepancy
between the objects of the activities in the school and the workplace. The same task
was given to a plumber, who owns a workshop and has extensive experience in
constructing cylinders of specified dimensions, and to students in their final year of
144 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

secondary education in the scientific stream. Both plumber and students were asked,
with the appropriate language to each group, to construct a cylindrical container,
with a bottom, of 1-L capacity and height of 20 cm. This task was a breakdown in
the normal behaviors of the students. Though the students had experience in solving
problems involving the volume of a cylinder, they did not have experience in actu-
ally constructing cylindrical containers with given specifications. Thus, the situa-
tion became problematized when the students were challenged and asked to produce
the cylinder, i.e., making explicit the discrepancy between the objects of the school
and workplace. The problematized situation involved students in physical actions
that were guided and shaped by mathematical ideas and practices. Thus, mathemati-
cal knowledge and mathematical competencies were inseparable from the work-
place context in which the activity was taking place. It is only when the students
viewed the object of the problem from the intended perspective of the workplace
that this routine task in the workplace became a challenging problem in school
mathematics.

Example 2: Mathematical Practice Discrepancy

Wake (2014) presents an example of how a routine workplace mathematical prac-

tice, when recontextualized in the school setting, turns out to be a challenging
school-mathematics problem. He presents a case study involving a group of college
students (aged 1619 years) following a prevocational engineering course, their
teacher, and a researcher to investigate the work of a railway signal engineer (Alan).
During a visit of the group to Alans workplace, Wake describes and illustrates the
latters work:
As part of this work, Alan decides where to position the speed boards that indicate to drivers
the maximum speed at which they should travel as they head toward an impending signal at
which they may have to stop. The gradient of the track is an important factor in the calcula-
tions Alan performs: because of the momentum of the train, a downhill gradient will require
a greater stopping distance, and so a greater distance between speed board and signal,
whilst for uphill gradients, the reverse is true. Consequently, Alan needs to calculate the
average gradient over a stretch of track. He showed the students the example from the train-
ing manual (p. 274)

Although routine for him, Alans method of calculating the average gradient was
problematic to the students. One example was a track of three stretches: A (600
yards with a fall gradient of 1/220), B (600 yards with a zero gradient), and C (400
yards with a fall gradient of 1/400). Alans calculations which were displayed to the
students showed that his average gradient was 1/429. Students were not able to rec-
oncile this answer with the average gradient they calculated using the school-
mathematics procedure of adding the values together and dividing by the number of
values. Apparently, Alan used the weighted mean (multiplying each stretch length
by its gradient, adding them up, and then dividing by the total distance) while the
arithmetic mean assumes that the three stretches are equal. This example illustrates
how a mathematical practice routinely used in the workplace became a problem for
9.4 The Workplace Context as an Interface Between Problem Solving in School 145

students because their meaning of the word average in school mathematics was
simply limited to the arithmetical mean, while the situation in the workplace required
the use of another average (weighted mean).

Example 3: Interpretation of Workplace Black-Boxed Mathematical Processes

Williams and Wake (2007) indicate that mathematical processes have been histori-
cally crystallised in black boxes shaped by workplace cultures: their instruments,
rules and divisions of labour tending to disguise or hide mathematics (p. 1). The
modern workplace is heavily dependent on automation to increase efficiency and
effectiveness. For that purpose, automated machines in the workplace hide mathe-
matical processes and only focus on inputs and outputs.
Williams and Wake (2007) provide an example of how making sense of black-
boxed mathematics in the workplace was problematic to a college student on place-
ment in an industrial chemistry laboratory, who carried out an experiment in which a
substance was heated so that it became thermally unstable. The interpretation of the
output of the experiment was highly problematic for the student because school graphs
obey very different conventions from the one produced by the machine. The horizon-
tal axis represents temperature (increasing from right to left) and also a function of the
temperature (10000/temperature + 273, increasing from left to right). To be consistent
with this, the student suggested that during the experiment, as time increased (reading
from left to right), the materials cooled down, which was in direct conflict with the
object of the experiment to heat the substance, i.e., to read from right to left in order to
determine the conditions under which the substance explodes. This case demonstrates
that making sense of the routine interpretation of outputs of black-boxed mathematics
in the workplace may constitute challenging problems for students.

9.4.2 Case Study Investigation

The findings of a study by LaCroix (2014) exemplify the inseparability of work-

place mathematics practices and workplace production activity. This means that, for
outsiders, workplace mathematical practices can only be fully understood within
the workplace activity system. It suggests that it would be beneficial for school-
mathematics students to have their attention drawn explicitly to the mathematically
pertinent details of the object, artifacts, community, division of labor, and rules of
the production of the specific workplace activity system. Collaborative group case
study investigations by students can be organized to collect and analyze data to gain
an understanding of how workplace mathematical practices are shaped by the inter-
actions among the nodes of the workplace activity system.
A variety of themes can be addressed using a variety of data collection approaches.
For example, LaCroix (2014) suggests the introduction of case studies of mathe-
matics practices and problems from various skilled trades, along with some of the
146 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

practical considerations and norms of corresponding workplace mathematics prac-

tices (p. 174). The role of mathematical practices in the school (object) and in the
workplace (artifacts), the role of technology, the kind of problems that arise in both
contexts, and the rationale and modality of division of labor are only some examples
of the themes that may be addressed in the case-study approach. The case study
approach may also use a variety of data collection approaches (interviews, observa-
tions, questionnaires) and qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques. An
added value of using a case study is that it will provide an opportunity for students
to practice communicative writing in a meaningful way-a practice often neglected
in mathematics education.

9.4.3 Joint SchoolWorkplace Focus Group

Focus groups provide a research tool used for different purposes: research, market-
ing, promotion, and cultural understanding. It is this last purpose that makes the
focus group a way by which students, teachers, and workers can share their different
collective construction of mathematical practices in school and in the workplace.
The facilitators of these focus groups could be mathematics teachers or workplace
supervisors. The ultimate aim of the focus group in this case is the development of
shared understanding of the meaning, rationale, and function of the mathematical
practices as they are enacted in the school and the workplace.

9.4.4 Technical Training Workshop

The technical training workshop provides a promising boundary object for opportu-
nities for students to engage in hands-on problem solving similar to that of the
workplace. LaCroix (2014) recommends the use of technical training shop courses
at the secondary school level, as a venue for introducing workplace mathematics
methods, related semiotic tools and norms, and the utility of particular ways of
doing workplace mathematics, as well as the relation of all of these to workplace
production (p. 174). Such a workshop also has the potential to provide students
with opportunities to develop workplace problem solving skills in an environment
in which doing mathematics is inseparable from the tools and means of production.
In engaging in actual production practices of objects, students would develop
workplace-situated problem solving skills in such areas as measurement, estima-
tion, and design. Such workshops would serve interdisciplinary areas such as art,
science, vocational orientation, and communicative language skills.
In conclusion, three aspects of the workplace make it a vital context for problem
solving and applications of mathematics. For one thing, work constitutes a major
ongoing human activity within a wide range of different workplace contexts and in
all societies, both developing and developed. For another, work employs a variety
of mathematical ideas in different forms at different levels of complexity.
9.5 My Narrative About Workplace Mathematics 147

Finally, since the discrepancies between mathematical practices in the school and
the workplace are many, making sense of them constitutes a significant resource for
engaging students in real-world problem solving. This huge resource is yet to be
tapped in a significant way.

9.5 My Narrative About Workplace Mathematics

In hindsight, workplace mathematics did not come up in my school and university

mathematics education. It is only in elementary school that I experienced a few
mathematical problems that dealt mainly with selling and buying at a very artificial
and shallow level. In fact, students and teachers were conscious that these problems
did not deal with the real world but were simply contexts for practicing the mathe-
matics that was taught in class. It is unfortunate that things have little changed
regarding the role and place of workplace mathematics in current school-
mathematics curricula.
As an educator in mathematics education, I feel and appreciate, perhaps more
than the average person, the role of mathematics in the workplace, particularly in
those workplaces which we frequently visit in our daily life. However, it rarely
occurs to me to make sense of workplace mathematics in terms of my knowledge of
mathematics. This raises a serious motivational problem regarding making sense of
workplace mathematics in terms of school mathematics. If we, as individuals, do
not (or do not have motivation to) practice sense-making of workplace mathematics
in the reality of our daily life, why should students in school mathematics have that
motivation? The lack of student motivation to engage in real world activities is not
unique to the workplace but includes all other boundary objects. The question is not
whether we should or should not include them in school curricula, but rather to
weigh it against the alternatives. One could argue that student engagement in sense-
making of workplace mathematical practices would be more meaningful (and per-
haps) more motivational than engagement in manipulation of mathematical objects
that rarely have referents in the real world of students.
One way to enhance student motivation in school is to focus on the perspective of
common people (not in the school or workplace) regarding workplace mathematical
practices. In daily life, people are mostly involved in the workplaces of the service
sector such as banks and shopping establishments. Their needs in such places do not
go beyond adult literacy as defined by the Project for the International Assessment
of Adult Competencies (PIAAC), which involves the ability to access, use, interpret,
and communicate mathematical information, in contrast to mathematical literacy
underlying school mathematics as defined by the International Programme for
Student Assessment (PISA), which involves the capacity to formulate, employ, and
interpret mathematics in a variety of contexts. Thus, focusing on making sense of
school mathematics by interpreting and communicating the workplace-related math-
ematical information, which is part of students daily life, may increase their motiva-
tion to be engaged in making sense of workplace mathematical practices.
148 9 Workplace as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

My first involvement with workplace mathematical practice was motivated more

by situated learning than by workplace mathematical practices themselves. This
happened when, Iman Shahin, a former M.A. student of mine (now has an indepen-
dent mathematics educator), expressed a passionate interest in studying the mathe-
matical practices of young vendors, and in Laves theory of cognition in practice.
This research opened my eyes to the richness and complexity of workplace mathe-
matics even in this simple setting, in which highly motivated human agents (the
vendors) used complex mathematical practices while engaged in work that they
owned and managed without resorting to any technological tool. In this workplace
setting, mathematics was black-boxed in the heads of the vendors and not in tech-
nological gadgets (Jurdak & Shahin, 1999). After completing her M.A., Shahin
worked with me on a second research project whose purpose was to study and com-
pare the nature of spatial reasoning by practitioners (plumbers) in the workplace and
students in the school setting while constructing solids from plane surfaces (Jurdak
& Shahin, 2001). It was here that I came face to face with the discrepancies between
mathematical practices in schooling for the purpose of learning and mathematical
practices in the workplace for the purpose of production. It is in this context that I
discovered the power of activity theory to compare and contrast mathematical prac-
tices in the workplace and school mathematics. In this sense, the discovery of activ-
ity theory was crtical in my research career because it sensitized me to the importance
of making sense of the differences between problem solving practices in school
mathematics and the workplace their pedagogical implications to teaching and
learning problem solving in school mathematics.

References

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 132169.
Bakker, A., & Akkerman, S. F. (2014). A boundary-crossing approach to support students integra-
tion of statistical and work-related knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2),
223237.
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrm, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualiza-
tion. Journal of Education & Work, 14(1), 133156.
FitzSimons, G. E. (2014). Commentary on vocational mathematics education: where mathematics
education confronts the realities of peoples work. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2),
291305.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (1999). An ethnographic study of the computational strategies of a group
of young street vendors in Beirut. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 155172.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (2001). Problem solving activity in the workplace and the school:
The case of constructing solids. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(3), 297315.
LaCroix, L. (2014). Learning to see pipes mathematically: Preapprentices mathematical activity
in pipe trades training. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 157176.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept
of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). M. E. Sharpe: Armonk, NY.
References 149

OECD. (2010). PISA 2012 Mathematics Framework. Paris: OECD Publications. http://www.oecd.
org/dataoecd/8/38/46961598.pdf.
PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group. (2009). PIAAC numeracy: A conceptual framework. OECD edu-
cation working papers, No. 35.Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/220337421165.
Roth, W. M. (2014). Rules of bending, bending the rules: The geometry of electrical conduit bend-
ing in college and workplace. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 177192.
Roth, W., Leeb, Y., & Hsu, P. (2009). A tool for changing the world: Possibilities of cultural-
historical activity theory to reinvigorate science education. Studies in Science Education, 45(2),
131167.
Steen, L. A. (Ed.). (1990). On the shoulders of giants: New approaches to numeracy. Washington:
National Academy Press.
Wake, G. (2014). Making sense of and with mathematics: The interface between academic math-
ematics and mathematics in practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 86(2), 271290.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007). Black boxes in workplace mathematics. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 64(3), 317343.
Chapter 10
STEM Education as a Context for Real-World
Problem Solving

The acronym STEM has political value for national and state
policies, even if its meaning is not clear. Conversely, the
ambiguous acronym STEM has little value when designing
school programs and recommending instructional practices.
STEM has potential for a significant innovation in education,
one that could align with contemporary education standards and
provide direction for crucial components of education reform.
(Bybee, 2013, p. 2)

STEM is an acronym used by The National Science Foundation for more than two
decades to refer to the four separate and distinct elds we know as science, technol-
ogy, engineering, and mathematics. On the other hand, STEM education is a term
that has been used by different educators in various contexts differently. Minimally,
STEM education encompasses approaches that explore teaching and learning
between/among any two or more of the STEM subject areas (Sanders, 2009, p. 21).
In the title of this chapter, STEM refers to science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics as separate disciplines. The purpose of this chapter is to explore, from
the perspective of mathematics education, STEM opportunities for real-world prob-
lem solving in school mathematics.
STEM education, a new comer to the educational scene, is viewed by many edu-
cators as ambiguous and problematic. Sanders (2009) expresses his skepticism of
using STEM to refer to STEM education as business as usualthe universal prac-
tice in American schools of disconnected science, mathematics, and technology
education (p. 20). Bybee (2013) states that the education community has embraced
STEM as a slogan without taking the time to determine what it really means when
the term is applied in educational contexts. Williams (2011) writes that STEM edu-
cation is based on the rationale that
it will better equip a workforce for dealing with the contemporary nature of business and
industry, and encourage more school leavers to seek further training and employment in areas
of engineering and science. The problem for educators here is that the consequent absence of
a sound educational rationale for this combination of subjects inhibits its development. (p. 31)

As a background to the discussion, this chapter presents an overview of current

thinking on STEM education followed by an exploration of STEM education as a
context for real-world problem solving in school mathematics.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 151

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_10
152 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

10.1 Overview of Perspectives on STEM Education

A survey of the literature on STEM education reveals that there are at least three
distinct conceptions of STEM education: STEM education as literacy, STEM edu-
cation as pedagogy, and STEM education as curriculum. What follows identies
and compares the basic distinctive features of the three perspectives.

10.1.1 STEM Education as Literacy

To conceive of STEM education as literacy means that it represents a lifelong, intel-

lectual process of gaining meaning from a critical interpretation and application of
knowledge information in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, as
both separate and integrated elds. This implies that STEM education is not restricted
to school learning but includes adult social and cultural life. Bybee (2013) was the
rst to dene STEM as literacy. For him STEM literacy refers to an individuals:
1. Knowledge, attitudes and skills to identify questions and problems in life situa-
tions, explain the natural and designed world, and have evidence-based conclu-
sions about STEM-related issues (p. xi).
2. Understanding of STEM disciplines as forms of human knowledge, inquiry, and
design (p. xi).
3. Awareness of how the STEM disciplines shape our environments.
4. Willingness to engage in STEM disciplines as a citizen.
In his denition of STEM literacy, Bybee afrms that the integration of the
STEM disciplines goes beyond the disciplines themselves and includes the compe-
tencies, attitudes, and skills that are integrated by their relevance to individual and
collective human activities in the material, intellectual, and cultural environments.

10.1.2 STEM Education as Pedagogy

Sanders (2009) introduced the notion of integrative STEM education to include:

approaches that explore teaching and learning between/among any two or more of
the STEM subject areas, and/or between a STEM subject and one or more other school
subjects (p. 21)

As a component of integrative STEM education, he developed pedagogy that he

called purposeful design and inquiry (PD&I). This pedagogy provides problem-
based learning that purposefully situates scientic inquiry and the application of
mathematics in the context of technological designing/problem solving (p. 21).
10.1 Overview of Perspectives on STEM Education 153

In this pedagogy, technology (T) and engineering (E) (technological design) are
combined with inquiry (S) and applications of mathematics (M) in designing arti-
facts (problem solving).
This perspective is exible enough to allow a multidisciplinary approach to
STEM disciplines, allowing teachers to integrate the subject they teach with other
STEM subjects without radical changes in curriculum organization. It also allows
for a pedagogical strategy that applies two or more STEM subjects across different
teaching situations, such as the PD&I approach (Sanders, 2009).
The Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA) approach is an instructional design heuris-
tic which has its roots in the epistemological theory of modeling. According to Lesh
and Yoon (2007):
MEA are problem solving activities that elicit a model. That is, their solutions require
students to express their current ways of thinking (i.e., their relevant models) in forms that
are tested and rened multiple times. So, nal solutions involve not only model develop-
ment but also the development of constructs and conceptual systems that the models
embody (p. 163).

Although it involves engineering design processes, the MEA approach has its
own distinctive features. The following steps were identied by Morgan, Moon, and
Barroso (2013) as engineering design processes: identify problem and constraints,
research, ideate, analyze ideas, build, test and rene, communicate and reect.
According to Lesh and Yoon (2007), the principles for designing MEA include
engaging students in problem solving activities in which they recognize the need to
reconsider their current ways of thinking about the situation (identify problem and
constraints); challenging students to explicitly express their current understandings
(ideate, analyze ideas, build); engaging students in progressively testing and revis-
ing their understandings (test and rene); and enabling students to develop models
that serve as sharable and reusable conceptual tools (communicate and reect).
However, MEA differs from engineering design in its object and assumptions.
Whereas the object of engineering design is the production of a prototype, the object
of MEA is that of an instructional design. In addition, the outcome of the engineer-
ing design is a one-time prototype that satises preset specications while, the out-
come of the model-building in MEA is the development of models that serve as
sharable and reusable conceptual tools in other similar situations.
As stated the core of the MEA approach is the development of sharable and reus-
able models, one of the most important cognitive objectives of mathematics instruc-
tion. However, since they draw on concepts and conceptual systems from a variety
of disciplines or textbook topics (Lesh & Yoon, 2007, p. 164), models may serve
as vehicles to integrate STEM disciplines. For example, a MEA instructional design
may be used in science education capitalizing on the students science concepts and
conceptual systems. Moreover, because models may be expressed using a variety of
media, technology in its broadest sense plays a crucial role in the MEA instructional
design. In conclusion, MEA is an open instructional design that has the potential to
integrate the learning of two or more STEM disciplines.
154 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

10.1.3 STEM Education as Curriculum

STEM education in the curriculum faces the problem of dening its relation to its
constituent disciplines of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Though the substance of this relationship remains problematic, its form may follow
one of two curriculum organizational structures: multidisciplinary or interdisciplin-
ary. STEM education as a multidisciplinary curriculum implies that each of the four
STEM disciplines contributes to STEM education but maintains its identity as a
separate discipline. In contrast, STEM education as an interdisciplinary curriculum
implies that each of the four STEM disciplines contributes to STEM education
while losing its identity as a separate curriculum. It is to be noted that it is easier to
implement the multidisciplinary rather than the interdisciplinary curriculum model
in STEM education because the former is more aligned with the current school cur-
riculum structure, which is basically a multidisciplinary one.
At the minimal level, the perspective of STEM education as curriculum requires
the articulation of a goal for STEM education, guidelines for STEM teaching/learn-
ing practices, and expectations of the STEM education learning outcomes. All of
these elements may vary from informal formulation to explicit, elaborate, and sys-
tematic formulation. In what follows some of the multidisciplinary approaches of
STEM education suggested in the literature will be surveyed.

Professional Teacher Development

This approach focuses on teaching practices as a means to making the existing cur-
riculum more STEM sensitive, usually done through professional teacher develop-
ment in-service programs intended to increase the understanding and awareness of
potential teachers of STEM disciplines. Asghar et al. (2012) reported a study whose
objective was providing professional development for teachers and instructional
leaders in Maryland in preparation for the implementation of STEM initiatives at
the state level. The professional development program was based on the premise
that highly discipline-specic mathematics and science teachers would need
focused professional development to equip them to transcend those disciplinary
boundaries in order to teach interdisciplinary subject matter (p. 87). Specically,
the study investigated the teachers understanding of a problem-based learning
(PBL) approach to interdisciplinary STEM education as well as their perceptions of
the challenges of the approach. From 20 of the 25 school systems in the state of
Maryland, 41 mathematics, science, engineering, and technology teachers signed
up for the study. The reported results indicate that although most teachers conceived
of PBL as an approach that used problems connected to real life situations within
their particular STEM disciplines, they expressed serious concerns regarding the
implementation of such an approach. Among the external challenges which contrib-
uted to participants resistance of integrating elements of STEM education in their
teaching, the authors reported three: (1) working with STEM colleagues would be
10.1 Overview of Perspectives on STEM Education 155

difcult if not impossible given the constraints imposed by the compartmentalized

system of teaching in the disciplines as well as the lack of adequate team prepara-
tion time; (2) perceiving STEM education as just one more subject that they were
expected to cover on top of other subjects, without taking away anything; and (3)
perceiving STEM education as not aligned with the way education was structured
and evaluated at the state level since teachers were evaluated on their ability to teach
a particular subject, and students were tested in that subject by subject-specic
high-stake tests. It looks like professional development by itself will face similar
resistance from teachers within the current structure and organization of schooling.

Capitalizing on Embedded Opportunities in STEM Discipline Curricula

This multidisciplinary approach involves the identication, in the standards of a

STEM discipline, instances that may be capitalized on as vehicles for STEM educa-
tion. This approach maintains single subject teaching on the one hand, but attempts
to connect the subject, at the curricular level, with other STEM disciplines, without
requiring basic changes in the current curriculum organization. The identied
opportunities for STEM education in one STEM discipline may serve as a space for
infusing other STEM activities in that discipline. For example, Capraro and Nite
(2014) examined the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics suggested
by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) for instances of inte-
gration of real-world problems that would indicate involvement of two or more
STEM subjects, and project-based learning. The study reported that the highest
number (42) of STEM integration instances was embedded in the NCTM standards.
These instances provide opportunities for schools and teachers to inject elements of
STEM education integration.

Interaction Between STEM Subjects

Williams (2011) suggests a school-based approach to develop interaction between

STEM subjects by fostering cross-curricular links in a context where the integrity
of each subject remains respected. (p. 32). According to him, providing links
among STEM subjects, when the rationale for enhancing student learning outcomes
for such links is judged to be clear, is left to the subject teacher.

Interdisciplinary STEM Education

STEM education as an interdisciplinary curriculum implies that each of the four

STEM disciplines contributes to STEM education but each discipline loses its iden-
tity as a separate curriculum. Interdisciplinary STEM education involves interdisci-
plinary student learning and/or teaching. One approach for interdisciplinary STEM
education is project-based learning. Capraro, Capraro, and Morgan (2013)
156 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

developed a STEM Project-based Learning (PBL) approach to learning which inte-

grates engineering design principles with the K-16 curriculum. This view, which
adopts the STEM project-based learning approach, is one in which the elds are all
supportive and integrated where applicable with the design principles undergird-
ing the problem solving processes contained in the project (p. 1). According to
Capraro and Jones (2013), PBL is suited for interdisciplinary instruction because
it naturally involves many different academic skills, such as reading, writing and
mathematics and is suited for building conceptual understanding through the assim-
ilation of different subject areas (p. 52). PBL builds on engineering design as the
cornerstone and the foundation on which students bring their compartmentalized
knowledge of science, technology, and mathematics to bear on solving meaningful
real-world problems. For example, Wilhelm (2014) documents how well STEM
education graduate students interacted with project-based materials as they engaged
in interdisciplinary teaching and learning. The study reported that the project-based
approach made signicant gains on lunar-related concepts and deepened students
understanding in domains that included spatial reasoning.
In summary, only forms of STEM education that maintain the integrity and iden-
tity of mathematics education as a separate school subject may be useful contexts to
engage students in real-world problem solving. This is because the interdisciplinary
forms of STEM education that integrate mathematics with other STEM subjects
tend to use mathematics as a tool to teach those subjects. The forms of STEM edu-
cation that seem to be promising in this regard are: STEM education as a pedagogy,
STEM opportunities embedded in mathematics curricula, and interaction between
mathematics and other STEM disciplines.

10.2 Integrative Objects Among STEM Disciplines

An integrative object is an object that can interface between two or more STEM
disciplines. An integrative object may be a concept, principle, procedure, or goal,
and may belong to one or more STEM disciplines. Three objects appear in the lit-
erature as possible integrative objects: problem solving and inquiry, design, and
real-world oriented goals.

10.2.1 Problem Solving

Problem solving forms the essence of mathematics and is one of the most frequently
used integrative objects to link STEM disciplines. Almost all perspectives on STEM
education mention problem solving as a STEM integrative object. For example,
Bybee (2013) includes knowledge, attitudes and skills to identify question, and
problems in life situations as components of STEM literacy. Sanders (2009) includes
problem-based learning that purposefully situates scientic inquiry and the appli-
cation of mathematics in the context of technological designing/problem solving
10.2 Integrative Objects Among STEM Disciplines 157

(p. 21) as part of the purposeful design and inquiry (PD&I) which he developed.
Also, the perspective of STEM education as curriculum uses problem solving as an
integrative object (Asghar et al., 2012; Capraro and Nite (2014). Capraro et al.
(2013) made problem-based learning a cornerstone of STEM Project-Based
Learning (PBL). Inquiry, the key process in science education, which corresponds
to problem solving in mathematics education, is also used frequently in almost all
perspectives on STEM education.

10.2.2 Design

The modern world we live in is more of a designed than natural world. These designs,
whether spatial, graphic, or symbolic, inhabit our lives on a daily basis and as such
offer an untapped resource for learning school mathematics as well as a common
space between the school and the outside world, which may provide students the
opportunities to engage in real-world problem solving in their school mathematics.
Design is the core of engineering and the cornerstone in almost all STEM educa-
tion perspectives. Sanders (2009) includes design as a component of his suggested
pedagogy purposeful design and inquiry (PD & I). STEM education as a curricu-
lum uses design as an integrative object (Asghar et al. 2012; Capraro & Nite, 2014).
Capraro et al. (2013) made design a cornerstone of STEM Project-Based Learning
(PBL) to integrate engineering design principles with the K-16 curriculum (p. 1).
Design processes are closely linked to mathematical processes. Processes such
as construction of mathematical procedures and algorithms, geometric construc-
tions, model-building, and even mathematical proofs involve design processes. The
publication of Nobel Prize Winner Herb Simons book, The Sciences of the Artificial
(1970) elevated the status of design to a new level to make it the core of the sci-
ences of the articial, which include engineering, as well as architecture, business,
education, law and medicine. As a result, the design sciences, which deal with arti-
cial (designed) things, came to be distinguished from the natural sciences, which
deal with what natural things are and how they work.
In the mid 1990s, the idea of mathematics education as design science started to
be debated. Wittmann (1995) suggests the idea that mathematics education be con-
sidered a design science. He argues the position that mathematics education should
concentrate:
on constructing articial objects, namely teaching units, sets of coherent teaching
units and curricula as well as the investigation of their possible effects in different educa-
tional ecologies. Indeed the quality of these constructions depends on the theory-based
constructive fantasy, the ingenium, of the designers, and on systematic evaluation, both
typical for design sciences (pp. 36263).

Lesh and Sriraman (2005) continue the discussion on mathematics education as a

design science by reconceptualizing the eld of mathematics education research as
one of a design science which involves the interaction of subjects, conceptual sys-
tems and technology, inuenced by social constraints and affordances. Informed by
research paradigms in design sciences, they suggest a framework for mathematics
158 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

education researchers to develop both models and theories which encourage diver-
sity, rigorous testing, communication, and accumulation.
Moving from mathematics as a design profession or eld of study to the domain
of school learning, the question of whether design has a place and value as an object
of learning in mathematics education poses itself. Design is relatively the new
comer of the triad (science, technology, design) to the arena of school mathematics
and teaching. In their analysis of the 2000 NCTM standards, Capraro and Nite
(2014) report that, although design is not explicitly mentioned, the NCTM geome-
try strand lists nature, art, and the sciences as possible arenas in which to experi-
ence geometry in our world and in the Measurement Standard; maps, blueprints,
science, and even literature as sources for the creation of problems for students to
learn more about similarity, ratio, and proportionality. Obviously geometry involves
the study of naturally occurring designs and artistic man-made designs. Maps and
blueprints are articial designs and examples of a wide range of graphic designs that
can support school-mathematics learning. In this context, Shaffer (1997) explores
one example of an open learning environment created by combining mathematics
and design activities in a mathematics studio. The results suggest that as a result
of working in a studio learning environment, students can learn about the mathemat-
ical concept of symmetry, use visual thinking to solve mathematical problems, and
develop a more positive attitude towards mathematics.

10.2.3 Real-World Oriented Goals

Almost all perspectives of STEM education have included applications in real life
as an ultimate aim. Bybee (2013) makes the ability to use knowledge, attitudes and
skills to identify questions and problems in life situations, explain the natural and
designed world (p. xi) an essential component of STEM literacy. STEM project-
based learning (Capraro et al., 2013) is intended to engage students in authentic
tasks that result in specic learning essential in the current standards-based educa-
tional model, while connecting K-12 and post-secondary education and addressing
the future workplace learning needs (p. 2). Sanders (2009) assert that in the world
outside of schools, design and scientic inquiry are routinely employed concur-
rently in the engineering of solutions to real-world problems (p. 21).

10.3 Interfacing School-Mathematics Problem Solving

and STEM Disciplines to Cross

In Chap. 4, it is argued that the STEM context is a boundary object that can be struc-
tured to enable students to cross the boundary between real-world and school-
mathematics problem solving. In this section we explore possible instructional
designs which use STEM subjects as contexts to enable crossing the boundary
between school-mathematics and real-world problem solving.
10.3 Interfacing School-Mathematics Problem Solving and STEM Disciplines to Cross 159

10.3.1 Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA)

As explained in Sect. 10.1.2, the MEA instructional design heuristic engages students
in problem solving activities that elicit a model. The MEA relates to STEM in two
ways. First, the situation in the MEA approach often exists within STEM subjects.
Second, since the abilities that are critical for success in model-eliciting activities are
similar to those that are valued in STEM subjects, the MEA approach tends to moti-
vate students to engage in problem solving activities that may increase their chances
of competing for sought-after jobs in the real world. Finally, since the situation in the
MEA approach often (but not always) exists outside the world of mathematics, it may
act as a tool for linking problem solving in school mathematics and in the real world.

10.3.2 STEM Project-Based Learning (PBL)

Capraro et al. (2013) dene STEM Project Based Learning as an ill-dened task
within a well-dened outcome situated with a contextually rich task requiring stu-
dents to solve several problems which when considered in their entirety showcase
student mastery of several concepts of various STEM subjects (p. 2). Capraro et al.
(2013) use PBL in the engineering rather than the modeling concept of design. As
in engineering, the object is a well-dened outcome that is communicated to stu-
dents in the form of a design brief which contains the constraints, establishes cri-
teria, may or may not establish evaluation standards, clearly communicates the
deliverables, and outlines the conditions under which the PBL inquiry occurs
(p. 4). Another component of STEM Project Based Learning is problem-based
learning, which uses a problem statement that both guides the learning and any
resultant activities in exploring the topic. The role of mathematics in STEM PBL
varies between being the center of the project or a tool for the project. The useful-
ness of the STEM PBL for interfacing mathematics problem solving in school and
the real world is contingent on the mathematics teachers selection of mathemati-
cally rich projects based on the STEM PBL approach. When mathematically rich
projects are chosen, they may provide additional windows of opportunity for stu-
dents to engage in real-world problem solving through the applied disciplines of
science, technology and engineering.

10.3.3 Mathematics Studio

The mathematics studio concept was suggested by Shaffer (1997) for learning
mathematics and art simultaneously in an art studio-like environment (p. 96).
Shaffer (2005) elaborates and broadens the concept of mathematics studio as an
open studio-like environment for learning mathematics, which (1) is modelled after
the practices and pedagogy of a design profession; (2) engages students in
160 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

technology-supported activities that preserve the linkages between pedagogy and

epistemology by which professionals become members of their community of
practice (p. 3); and, (3) assigns the teacher the role of a critic who offers struc-
tured interaction by asking probing questions, offering suggestions, validating
existing design choices, pointing out potential problems, or working on a piece of
the design together. Shaffer (2005) reports a study in which the practices from an
architectural design studio were used to help middle school students understand
transformational geometry through design activities in a computationally rich learn-
ing environment.
The mathematics studio integrates mathematics, design, and technology. One
distinctive feature of the mathematics studio is that it allows the teacher to choose
the subject matter to be learned in the studio environment, providing a vehicle to
connect mathematics with STEM disciplines without comprising the identity and
integrity of mathematics as a separate discipline with its own goals. Another distinc-
tive feature is that the connections between mathematics, design and technology are
based on the practices, pedagogy, and epistemology by which professionals in a
design eld become members of their community of practice.
By its nature, the mathematics studio is directly connected with the real world
since the learning in the mathematics studio is rooted in the practices and pedagogy
of a design profession. Thus, the physical set-up (studio) in which teaching and
learning take place and the principles which govern teaching and learning in the
mathematics studio are modelled after those principles through which professionals
in a certain design eld become members of their community of practice. Among
all STEM boundary objects, the mathematics studio alone has the advantage of
being based on the learning practices of an actual design profession.
Moreover, the mathematics studio lends itself to real-world problem solving in
school mathematics. The design component in the mathematics studio is a rich eld
for problematic real-world situations that call for the engagement of mathematical
knowledge. On the other hand, the technology-supported activities are aligned with
the practices of the community of practice of a specic design eld, rendering prob-
lem solving more authentic and meaningful.
In summary, STEM education, a new comer to the school curriculum, has yet to
be translated from a political slogan to an educational task. In their attempts to
establish STEM education as a valid educational endeavor, educators have sug-
gested a variety of perspectives. These include STEM education as literacy, peda-
gogy, or curriculum. The constructs (problem solving, design, and real-world
oriented goals), which are objects used to integrate STEM disciplines, seem to be
well aligned with the goals of real-world problem solving. The chapter identies
three STEM objects that can interface problem solving in the school and the real
world. These objects are: Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA), STEM Project Based
Learning (PBL), and mathematic studio. These objects can be used as vehicles to
promote real-world problem solving in school mathematics while maintaining the
identity of mathematics education as a separate subject, and without necessarily
establishing curricular alliances with other STEM disciplines.
10.4 My Narrative About STEM 161

10.4 My Narrative About STEM

It is only about a decade ago that I became aware of STEM education. I do not know
exactly when and how I learned about STEM, but I believe my rst encounter with
the term was through American media. Like everybody else, I did not know what
STEM meant beyond the fact that it involved the four disciplines (science, technol-
ogy, engineering, and mathematics), and I was somewhat bothered then that the
M for mathematics came last in the acronym STEM, assuming then that this
reected a lower status for mathematics than the other STEM disciplines. Later, I
realized this was not the case and that the acronym STEM was modelled after the
American tradition of creating acronyms (for long names) that sound nice and evoke
curiosity about what they mean. In fact Sanders (2009) tells that even the National
Science Foundation (NSF) had some debate about the acronym. In the 1990s, the
NSF began using SMET as shorthand for science, mathematics, engineering,
and technology, perhaps to give priority to science and mathematics. But it turned
out that SMET sounded too much like smut, (which means lth), and the
search ended when the STEM acronym was borna word that is nice-sounding
and that has multiple meanings and thus evokes curiosity for what it means.
STEM education, initiated in the USA, then spread to a few other western coun-
tries, rationalized more by economic rather than educational arguments. The eco-
nomic arguments for STEM focused on changing work-force patterns, increasing
the role of technology, globalization and economic competitiveness. For example
the Obama administration in the USA argued that a focus on STEM will result in
reafrming and strengthening Americas role as the worlds engine of scientic
discovery and technological innovation which is essential to meeting the challenges
of this century (Obama, 2009). Until recently, and despite the great investments
made in STEM education (President Obamas 2015 budget invested $2.9 billion in
programs across the Federal Government on STEM education (White House,
2015)), educators such as Bybee (2013), still argue that the education community
has embraced STEM as a slogan without taking the time to determine what it really
means when the term is applied in educational contexts. However, in the last 5 years,
the educational foundations of STEM education started to be laid down and new
conceptualizations of STEM education as literacy, pedagogy, and curriculum were
articulated. In an attempt to acquire a feeling of the trend in terms of the number of
STEM scholarly publications, I searched Google Scholar for publications with
STEM education in the title. The search output turned out 12 such publications
during the period 20002004, 175 publications during 20052009, and 916 publica-
tions during 20101015. If anything, this information indicates a signicantly
increasing trend in educational scholarly engagement with STEM education.
Unaware of the STEM education conceptual framework earlier, I did engage in
one study that may now be categorized as research in STEM education. The study
by BouJaoude and Jurdak (2010) attempted to integrate mathematical modeling,
physics, and microcomputer-based labs (MBL) in order to understand the nature of
162 10 STEM Education as a Context for Real-World Problem Solving

student discourse during lab sessions and the role of this integration in promoting
mathematization. The study was conducted in two grade 11 classes in which stu-
dents in one group studied Hookes law and Newtons second law of motion using
MBL while a different group of students studied the same topics with the same
physics teacher using a verication-type lab (VTL) approach. The integration of
mathematics and physics was achieved by having the physics and mathematics
teachers co-teach all lab sessions, and the technology that students used was the
sensor-based probes which collect physical data in real time and a communication
device that can digitize and store data to avail them in different mathematical repre-
sentationsa technology that is becoming the standard technology in the current
science lab. The integrated setup that was used provided students with opportunities
to work in authentic scientic settings similar to those in which scientists work to
come up with generalizations reected in mathematical models of real phenomena.
Results showed that (1) conceptual knowledge type utterances were signicantly
more frequent in MBL sessions, (2) cognitive processes of remembering and under-
standing were signicantly more frequent in the MBL sessions, (3) students spent
most of their time analyzing the graphs in the MBL sessions, and (4) MBL has the
potential to promote mathematization in favorable instructional environments in
physics laboratory classes. It is to be noted that, although it clearly falls within
STEM educational research, the study did not mention the word STEM at all.
My attitude toward STEM education is somehow ambivalent. On the one hand I
value the bridges that STEM disciplines may provide to mathematics education to
connect school-mathematics and real-world problem solving; however, I have con-
cerns about a curricular alliance among the STEM disciplines. My main concern as
a mathematics educator is that integrating the four STEM disciplines in a curricular
alliance would use mathematics as a tool for science and engineering and thus
threaten the identity of mathematics as a mode of thinking. Venville, Wallace,
Rennie, and Malone (2002) concludes that there are many factors mitigating
against changes in traditional school discipline curriculum structures (p. 54)
including what and how assessment of student learning would look like, current
subject-based teacher qualications, current instructional organization by periods,
subject-based textbooks, and resistance from school staff, parents, and professional
organizations. I am more inclined at this stage to support Williamss (2011) call to
develop interaction between STEM subjects by fostering cross-curricular links in
a context where the integrity of each subject remains respected (p. 32).
I believe that STEM education is a sublime object in the sense that it is a highly
desirable object whose achievement is blocked by objective reality considerations
and yet whose desirability continues. In the words of Clarke (2014), STEM educa-
tion, like any sublime object, is a concept that derives from desire and specically
the inability of such sublime objects to satiate that desire (p. 587), and as a result
of their elevation as irrefutably desirable entities associated with fantasmatic visions
of harmony and totality (p. 588), sublime objects tend to assume a reality which
transcends the actual dynamic reality.
References 163

References

Asghar, A., Ellington, R., Rice, E., Johnson, F., & Prime, G. M. (2012). Supporting STEM educa-
tion in secondary science contexts. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 6(2),
85125.
BouJaoude, S. B., & Jurdak, M. E. (2010). Integrating physics and math through microcomputer-
based laboratories (MBL): Effects on discourse type, quality, and mathematization.
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 10191047.
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, VA:
National Science Teachers Association.
Capraro, M. M., Capraro, R. M., & Morgan, J. R. (Eds.). (2013). STEM project-based learning: An
integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach. Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers.
Capraro, M., & Jones, M. (2013). Interdisciplinary STEM project-based learning. In M. M.
Capraro, R. M. Capraro, & J. R. Morgan (Eds.), STEM project-based learning: An integrated
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach (pp. 5158). Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers.
Capraro, M. M., & Nite, S. B. (2014). Stem integration in mathematics standards. Middle Grades
Research Journal, 9(3), 1.
Clarke, M. (2014). The sublime objects of education policy: Quality, equity and ideology.
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 35(4), 584598.
Lesh, R., & Sriraman, B. (2005). Mathematics education as a design science. ZDM, 37(6),
490505.
Lesh, R., & Yoon, C. (2007). What is distinctive in (our views about) models & modelling perspec-
tives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching? In W. Blum, P. Galbraith,
H. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th
ICMI study (pp. 185192). Boston, MA: Springer.
Morgan, J., Moon, A., & Barroso, L. (2013). Engineering better projects. In M. M. Capraro, R. M.
Capraro, & J. R. Morgan (Eds.), STEM project-based learning: An integrated science, technol-
ogy, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) approach (pp. 2937). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Obama, B. (2009) Educate to innovate. Retrieved on 30 Aug 2015 from http://www.whitehouse.
gov/the-press-ofce/presidentobama-launches-educate-innovate-campaign-excellence-sci-
ence-technology-en.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4),
2026.
Shaffer, D. W. (1997). Learning mathematics through design: The anatomy of Eschers World. The
Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16(2), 95112.
Shaffer, D. W. (2005). Studio mathematics: The epistemology and practice of design pedagogy as
a model for mathematics learning. WCER Working Paper No. 2005-3. Wisconsin Center for
Education Research.
Simon, H. A. (1970). The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT-Press.
Venville, G., Wallace, J., Rennie, L., & Malone, J. (2002). Curriculum integration: Eroding the
high ground of science as a school subject? Studies in Science Education, 37, 4383.
White House. (2015). Preparing Americans with 21st century skills. Retrieved from https://www.
whitehouse.gov/sites/default/les/microsites/ostp/Fy%202015%20STEM%20ed.pdf on
August 30, 2015.
Wilhelm, J. (2014). Project-based instruction with future STEM educators: An interdisciplinary
approach. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(4), 8090. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.
org/stable/43632018.
Williams, J. (2011). STEM education: Proceed with caution. Design and Technology Education,
16(1). Retrieved from: https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/ojs/index.php/DATE/article/view/1590/1514.
Wittmann, E. C. (1995). Mathematics education as a design science. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 29(4), 355374.
 Part IV
The Framework
Chapter 11
Learning Real-World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics:
A Multiple-Perspective Framework

Experience is a matter of the interaction of organism with its

environment, an environment that is human as well as physical,
that includes the materials of tradition and institutions as well
as local surroundings. The self acts as well as undergoes, and
its under goings are not impressions stamped upon an inert
wax but depend upon the way the organism reacts and
responds. The organism is a force, not a transparency.
(Dewey, 1934, p. 246)

The multiple-perspective framework for learning real-world problem solving in

school mathematics is grounded in two theories: the cultural historical activity the-
ory (CHAT) and boundary objects. The first generation of CHAT involved the
development of the concept of basic individual human activity (Leontev, 1981;
Vygotsky, 1978); the second generation involved the development of collective
activity as represented by the activity system (Engestrm, 1987); and the third gen-
eration involved the development of the interconnected activity system formed by
two or more different but interacting activity systems (Engestrm, 2001). The
multiple-perspective learning framework was also informed by the two concepts of
boundary crossing (Suchman, 1994) and boundary object (Star & Griesemer, 1989).
Boundary crossing refers to a persons transitions and interactions across different
sites, and the concept of boundary object, refers to artifacts which facilitate crossing
the boundary between two social worlds by fulfilling an interfacing function
between them. Engestrm (2001) applied the two concepts of boundary crossing
and boundary object to explain the transition and interaction between two or more
different connected activity systems.
I use the term multiple-perspective to characterize the multiple theoretical
dimensionality of the framework for learning real-world problem solving in school
mathematics in terms of crossing boundaries between problem solving in the real
world and in school mathematics. The multiple-perspective framework in this chap-
ter employs four theoretical perspectives (modeling, narrative, critical mathematics
education, and ethnomathematics) and two contexts (workplace and STEM) that
enable learners to cross the boundary between problem solving in the real world and
in school mathematics. Each of the perspectives and contexts is introduced,
explained, and argued in a separate chapter in this book.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 167

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_11
168 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

a School math problem solving activity

Mediating artifacts (Math
& language) Zone A
)

Subjects Object (Learning sch.

(Students) PS written solutions)
Zone B

Rules (School Community Division of labor

polices and (Teacher and (Teacher and
socialnorms) class mates) class mates)
system

b Real world problem solving activity

system
Constructed object:
Mediating artifacts Real world problem
(All available artifacts) solving in school
math
Object
Subjects (Solving real word PS
Zone C
(Individuals) (decisions)

Rules (Social- Community (Family Division of labor

cultural norms) and peers) (Family and peers)

Fig. 11.1 Zones of learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics: Zone A: individ-
ual learning zone; Zone B: collective learning zone; Zone C: interfaced learning zone in the inter-
connected school and real-world activity systems

This chapter attempts to characterize the object, nature, and conditions of learn-
ing real-world problem solving in school mathematics in three distinct, but interac-
tive, learning zones of learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics:
Zone A refers to the individual learning zone, which is embedded in zone B, the
collective learning zone at school, and which in turn is embedded in zone C, the
interfaced learning zone in the interconnected school and real-world activity sys-
tems (Fig. 11.1).
11.1 Individual Learning Activity 169

11.1 Individual Learning Activity

The triangular representation of Leontevs activity as an interaction of the triad

(subject, mediating artifacts, and object), taken in isolation of its rich nuance, may
not convey the complexity and dynamic nature of the activity concept. It is useful,
therefore, to delve a little into the concept of activity as originally presented by
Vygotsky and Leont'ev and later interpreted and expanded by Engestrm.
According to Leontev (1978, 1981), activity involves a person or group of per-
sons engaged in an activity toward an object directed by a predetermined goal, using
tools (artifacts) to achieve an outcome embodying the intended goal. Leontev dis-
tinguishes three activity-related concepts: activity, actions, and operationsand he
relates these concepts to the motives, goals, and conditions under which the activity
is performed. The dynamics of an activity are shown in Fig. 11.2 (Wilson, 2006).
The starting point in any activity is that the person (or persons) who engage in the
activity should have a motive, without which the activity cannot be initiated.
According to Leontev (1978), unmotivated activity is activity in which the
motive is subjectively and objectively hidden. The motive has to be concretely
translated into a possible achievable goal. The desire to achieve this goal generates
actions which constitute the activity, and these actions are not random but subordi-
nated to a conscious purpose on the part of the person (or persons) engaged in the
activity. Just as the concept of activity is subordinate to the concept of motive, the
concept of action is subordinate to the concept of goal. Actions are mediated
operationally by the artifacts (physical and symbolic tools) that are accessible under
the objective conditions of the specific social-cultural context in which the activity
is to be realized.
The learning activity is one exemplar of Leontevs concept of individual activ-
ity. A learning activity is a process in which the learner is motivated to learn specific
competencies by taking actions, subordinated to the intended competence, and by
using the operations that are mediated, as well as constrained, by the artifacts that
exist in the objective learning environment. Thus, the activity of learning mathemat-

Fig. 11.2 Activity, actions,

Motive generates Activity
and operations (taken from
Wilson (2006))
determines is composed of

Goal results in Actions

affected by are composed of

Conditions determine Operations

170 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

ics in school is the process by which the learner is motivated to learn mathematical
competencies and concepts by taking actions that are consciously subordinated to
the intended mathematical goal, using operations that are mediated and constrained
by the accessible artifacts (physical and symbolic) under the objective conditions of
the social-cultural context of the school.
A core premise of activity theory is the centrality of the learners agency in the
learning activity. For the learning activity to start, the learner has to be motivated to
become engaged in the activity, and the goal of said activity has to be meaningful to
the learner to evoke engagement in taking action toward realizing the goal. The
choice of actions is contingent on the learners choices and consciousness of the
potential effectiveness of the actions in realizing the intended goal. It is also up to
the learner to choose what mediating artifacts to use and how to use them to realize
the intended goal within the objective reality of the learning context.
The basic features of the learning activity as originally suggested by Leontev
had their roots in the experiential learning of Dewey and formed the basis of the
expanded learning of Engestrm Leontevs emphasis on the centrality of the learn-
ers agency, actions, and interaction within the social and physical surroundings in
realizing the goal of the activity are shared by the three scholars. Engestrm (2007)
makes learners agency, actions and interaction with the world as part of expansive
learning:
It is learning by experiencing that puts the participants into imagined, simulated, and real
situations that require personal engagement in actions with material objects and artifacts
(including other human beings) that follow the logic of an anticipated or designed future
model of the activity (p. 38).

Dewey (1934), on the other hand, expresses almost the same idea long before
activity theory:
Experience is a matter of the interaction of organism with its environment, an environment
that is human as well as physical, that includes the materials of tradition and institutions as
well as local surroundings. The organism brings with it through its own structure, native
and acquired forces that play a part in the interaction. The self acts as well as undergoes,
and its under goings are not impressions stamped upon an inert wax but depend upon the
way the organism reacts and responds. The organism is a force, not a transparency (p. 246).

The premise that learning transforms both the individual and the world is also
present in the works of the three scholars. Engestrm (2001) introduces his concept
of expansive learning, which stipulates that expansive learning does not only trans-
form the learner but also the activity system in which the learner is operating. Dewey
(1934) also expresses similar ideas:
In an experience, things and events belonging to the world, physical and social, are trans-
formed through the human context they enter, while the live creature is changed and devel-
oped through its intercourse with things previously external to it. (p. 246).

However, although not explicit in Leontev version of activity theory, the idea of
transformative learning is central in Leontevs version of cultural historical activity
theory.
11.3 Zone B: Collective Learning Problem Solving Activity in School Mathematics 171

11.2 Zone A: Individual Learning of Problem Solving

in School Mathematics

From an activity theoretical perspective, the activity of learning real-world problem

solving in school mathematics is viewed as a process in which the learner is moti-
vated to engage in actions that are consciously subordinated to the intended goal of
real-world problem solving, using operations that are mediated by artifacts (physical
and symbolic) that are accessible under the objective conditions of the social-cultural
context in which the activity is to be achieved. Based on this conception, the learning
of real-world problem solving is determined by the task (object/motive), the agency
of the learner (engagement in conscious actions), and the objective conditions (medi-
ating artifacts) of the social-cultural context of the learning environment. This implies
that the interaction among the three determinants of one given problem solving activ-
ity results in a diversity of activities. For example, a certain task (object/motive)
given to learners in the same learning environment is likely to produce a diversity of
activities depending on the agency of the individual learners. Similarly, a certain task
(object/motive) given to one learner in different learning environments is likely to
produce a diversity of activities depending on the consciousness of the learner of the
available and accessible mediating artifacts in the different learning environments.

11.3 Zone B: Collective Learning Problem Solving Activity

in School Mathematics

From an activity theoretical perspective, it is almost impossible to understand a

students problem solving behavior without considering the historical-cultural col-
lective activity in which such a student is embedded. Hence the individual learning
of problem solving (zone A) is also embedded in the collective activity of the school
system (zone B). The fact that learning zone A is embedded within learning zone B
not only shapes the identity of the triad (subject, mediating artifacts, and object) of
the individual learning in zone A, but also impacts its dynamics. The learner in zone
A does not assume only the identity of an individual but also the identity of a mem-
ber of a community which shares the same object. Thus, the learners problem solv-
ing actions and interactions are not simply individual behaviors linked to individual
motives, but also are moderated by the motives, actions, and interactions of the
community members. The mediating artifacts available to the learner are also com-
munal cultural objects closely linked to the historical-cultural development of the
school system. The object of the problem solving activity is also a communal object
defined and adopted by the school community.
The collective activity (zone B) introduces the concept of community to the
individual activity (zone A) and thus triggers profound consequences to the dynam-
ics of the individual learning activity. One main consequence is the need for divi-
sion of labor among the community members (student, school teachers and staff,
parents). This division of labor is a crucial concept in the collective activity since it
172 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

involves not only the visible role assignment but also invisible power structures
that might limit or expand students agency during their learning process. Normally,
it is the teacher who makes decisions regarding division of labor between teacher,
individual student, and class in school teaching/ learning. Though they reflect the
teachers pedagogic perspective, these decisions are rooted in the teachers concep-
tion of the source and exercise of power in the learning process. Consequently, the
individual learning process in the classroom is moderated by the provided opportu-
nities and the imposed limitations of the division of labor practices.
By introducing the concept of community to the individual activity (zone A), the
need arises for rules to govern the actions and interactions within the collective
activity (zone B). These rules are of two kinds. The regulatory rules are explicit and
public, while the social and cultural norms of the broader community of the school
are implicit and invisible. The regulatory rules deal with the governance and man-
agement of the interactions of the other nodes of the system (subject, mediating
artifacts, object, community, and division of labor) and their impact on learning and
teaching is direct and observable. On the other hand, the social and cultural norms
are reflected in traditions, customs, habits, and beliefs. There is strong evidence
from social-cultural research that social and cultural norms mediate school learning
in a significant way.

11.4 A Proposed Multiple-Perspective Framework

for Learning Real-World Problem Solving
in School Mathematics (Zone C)

Learning in zone A (individual learning activity) and in zone B (collective learning

activity) may explain learning in school mathematics, but they do not necessarily
explain real-world problem solving in school mathematics. As explained in Chap. 4,
to enable the functioning of real-world problem solving in school mathematics, we
need to expand zone B (already embedded in zone A) to an interfaced learning zone
(zone C in Fig. 11.1), which occurs in the activity system formed by interfacing the
two activity systems of school-mathematics problem solving and real-world prob-
lem solving.

11.4.1 Premises Underlying the Multiple-Perspective

Framework

The proposed multiple-perspective learning framework for learning real world

problem solving in school mathematics is based on key concepts from three theo-
ries. These key concepts are: interconnected activity systems, boundary objects, and
boundary crossing. The basic premises underlying the multiple-perspective learning
framework are presented below.
11.4 A Proposed Multiple-Perspective Framework for Learning Real-World Problem 173

Premise 1: Problem solving in school mathematics and problem solving in the real
world are two different but interacting activity systems.
The activity system is a core concept of activity theory (Engestrm, 1987). The
difference between the activity system of problem solving in the real world and the
activity system of problem solving in school is demonstrated in Sect. 4.5. If students
have to engage in real-world problem solving, then they are to navigate between the
two systems and thus impose an interaction between the two systems.
Premise 2: The sociocultural difference between the two activity systems of problem
solving in school mathematics and problem solving in the real world creates an
invisible boundary between them and thus leads to discontinuity in action or inter-
action as students move between the two social worlds.
The presence of discontinuities in actions and interactions of students when
they engage in real-world problem solving creates an invisible boundary between
the two social worlds. The boundary between problem solving in the real world
and the school is an expression of difference and sameness between them, similar
to that between two different countries which share a boundary: The two countries
are distinct but accessible through boundary crossing. For more details, consult
Chap. 4, Part 2.
Premise 3: The two activity systems of real-world problem solving and school-
mathematics problem solving can be interfaced to form a new interconnected activ-
ity system whose shared object is learning real-world problem solving in school
mathematics.
The interfaced activity system of problem solving in school mathematics and in
the real world is introduced and discussed in Chap. 4 (Sect. 4.7). It is also demon-
strated there that the interfaced system has the features of an activity system.
Premise 4: To establish or restore continuity in action or interaction as they move
between the school and the real world, students need to make an effort to cross the
boundary between these two social worlds.
The term boundary crossing was introduced to denote how professionals at
work may need to enter onto territory in which we are unfamiliar and, to some
significant extent, therefore unqualified for (Suchman, 1994, p. 25) and face the
challenge of negotiating and combining ingredients from different contexts to
achieve hybrid situations (Engestrm, Engestrm, & Krkkinen, 1995, p. 319).
The literature suggests that there are at least two conceptualizations for interfac-
ing interacting activity systems: Boundary crossing and identity making/remaking,
both of which start from the theoretical framework that underlies activity theory
(See Sect. 4.7.1 for a fuller discussion).
Premise 5: Learning real-world problems in school mathematics calls for the acti-
vation and use of boundary objects (mediating artifacts) and learning mechanisms
that facilitate learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics.
174 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

11.4.2 Boundary Objects in the Multiple-Perspective

Frame Work

Star and Griesemer (1989) introduce the concept of boundary object to indicate how
artifacts can fulfill a specific function in bridging intersecting practices. Boundary
objects are those objects that both inhabit several intersecting worlds and satisfy the
informational requirements of each of them. [They are] both plastic enough to adapt
to local needs and to the constraints of the several parties employing them, yet
robust enough to maintain a common identity across sites. They are weakly struc-
tured in common use, and become strongly structured in individual site use (p. 393).
This book introduced four perspectives and two contexts within each of which a
number of boundary objects were defined. These objects both inhabit the intersecting
worlds of real-world and school-mathematics problem solving and fulfill the function
of bridging the intersecting problem solving practices of the two worlds. The four
perspectives and the two contexts with their associated boundary objects were intro-
duced and discussed in six independent chapters: modeling (Chap. 5), narrative
(Chap. 6), critical mathematics education (Chap. 7), ethnomathematics (Chap. 8),
workplace context (Chap. 9), and STEM context (Chap. 10). It should be noted that
these boundary objects themselves act as the mediating artifacts of the interconnected
activity system of real-world problem solving in school mathematics (Fig. 11.3).

Theoretical perspective Boundary objects (mediating artifacts) for learning real world
problem in school mathematics

Modeling 1.Word problems as a boundary object

2.Technology-produced mathematical artifacts
3.Emergent modeling
4.Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA)

Narrative 1. Expanded Polyas framework of problem solving

2. Journal writing about real world problem solving
3. Modeling narratives
4. Historical narratives about mathematics-making

Critical mathematics 1. Critical mathematics education project

education 2. Critical reflection on mathematical practices

Ethnomathematics 1. Problematization of ethnomathematical practices

2. Exploration of historical culturally-specific problems
3. Student ethnomathematical research project

Workplace context 1. Workplace routines as school problems

2. Case study investigation
3. Joint school-workplace focus group
4. Technical training workshop

STEM context 1.Model-Eliciting Activities (MEA)

2. STEM project-based learning (PBL)
3. Mathematics Studio

Fig. 11.3 Perspectives and their boundary objects for learning real-world problem solving in
school mathematics
11.5 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework for Learning Real-World 175

Learning Definition Examples of processes

mechanism

Identification Identification of learning mechanism Othering

involves processes that define one practice Legitimating coexistence
in light of another, delineating how it
differs from the other practice

Coordination Coordination requires a communicative Translation between the

connection between diverse practices or different worlds
perspectives Boundary permeability

Reflection Reflective mechanism emphasizes not Perspective-making: making

only comprehension but also formulation
of distinctive perspectives
explicit ones understanding
and knowledge of an issue
Perspective-taking: taking of
the other into account, in
light of a reflexive knowledge
of ones own perspective,

Transformation Transformation leads to profound changes Confrontation

in practices, potentially even the creation Recognizing a shared
of a new, in-between practice, sometimes problem space
called a boundary practice. Hybridization

Fig. 11.4 Learning mechanisms and processes at the boundary between school-mathematics and
real-world problem solving (Source: Akkerman and Bakker, 2011)

11.4.3 Learning Mechanisms at the Boundary

Learning mechanisms at the boundary are those mechanisms that aim at recogniz-
ing, understanding, or integrating the intersecting problem solving practices of the
two worlds of problem solving in the real world and in school mathematics. In their
review paper, Akkerman and Bakker (2011) identify four learning mechanisms at
the boundary: identification, coordination, reflection, and transformation. A sum-
mary of the four learning mechanisms and examples of processes associated with
each is given in Fig. 11.4.

11.5 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework

for Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics

Learning in the proposed multiple-perspective framework assumes certain features

which generally follow from the theories on which it is based. In this section, some
of those features are identified and their theoretical underpinnings are explained.
One such feature is the centrality of the learners agency, a key concept in activity
176 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

theory (Leontev, 1978). The learners agency entails recognition that learning is
contingent on the learners motivation, consciousness, actions, and interactions with
the social, cultural, and physical environment in which learning is taking place. To
start the activity of learning, the learner has to have a motive to be engaged in the
activity. The learner has to perceive the goal of the activity as meaningful in order
to engage in actions toward realizing it. The choice of actions is contingent on the
learners consciousness of the social, cultural, and physical environment in which
learning is taking place. The Learners choice of mediating artifacts and how to use
them to realize the intended goal is contingent on ones consciousness of resources
in oneself as well as in the surrounding learning environment.
A second feature of learning in the proposed multiple-perspective is its develop-
mental nature, both horizontally and vertically. What is meant by development here
is the learners natural or acquired readiness to engage in an artifact (vertical develop-
ment) on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the development in the mode of repre-
sentation of the mediating artifacts (horizontal development). The vertical development
addresses the question of which mediating artifact (boundary object) is optimal for
which grade level. I assume that the mediating artifacts which belong to the narrative
perspective are optimal at an early age because narrative is closely connected with
language development, particularly speaking, whereas the mediating artifacts belong-
ing to critical mathematics education are optimal at later stages because these require
quite developed hypothetical and critical reasoning. Roughly speaking, an optimal
developmental sequence would be to start with narrative and modeling, followed by
design (STEM) in primary grades; (STEM) would be added in the middle grades; and
critical mathematics education, ethnomathematics, and workplace context would fol-
low in upper grades. This developmental sequence is just a hypothetical example;
other developmental sequences are possible depending on teacher, school and cur-
riculum judgments regarding learners readiness and environmental resources.
Horizontal development addresses the question of sequencing the representation
of a mediating artifact in increasing engagement with authentic real-world problem
solving. For example, the learning of a mediating artifact belonging to modeling for
a certain grade level may be sequenced in increasing real-world authenticity from a
textbook word problem, to a simulated real-world problem, to an authentic real-
world problem. However, learning real-world problem solving in school mathemat-
ics occurs at different levels along two dimensions: student cognitive functioning and
the extent to which learning is mediated by the real world. The learning mechanisms
identified by Akkerman and Bakker (2011) for learning on the boundary provide a
basis for characterizing the level of student cognitive functioning. The four learning
mechanisms they identify are identification, coordination, reflection, and transfor-
mation. Identification involves processes that define one practice (in this case school-
mathematics problem solving) in light of another (in this case real-world problem
solving), delineating how the one differs from the other. Cognitively, identification
requires recognition of the distinctions between school-mathematics and real-world
problem solving. Coordination requires translation between the different worlds
(school-mathematics and real-world problem solving), and as such it cognitively
requires comprehension, which is at a higher cognitive level than identification.
Reflection, on the other hand, requires formulation of the distinctive perspectives
11.6 My Narrative About Learning from Writing This Book 177

(perspective-making: making explicit ones understanding of school-mathematics

problem solving; and perspective-taking: taking into account problem solving in the
real world, in light of a reflexive knowledge of ones school-mathematics problem
solving). Transformation requires meta-cognitive processes, which makes it higher
cognitively than reflection. Transformation leads to profound changes in problem
solving practices, potentially even the creation of a new boundary practice of solving
real-world problems in school mathematics. Transformation requires the ability and
disposition to understand and act in the shared space of real-world problem solving
in school mathematics. As such, transformation is the highest cognitive level of func-
tioning in learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics. Because of
the hierarchical nature of the four learning mechanisms and for easy reference I shall
denote and refer to the four learning mechanisms numerically as level 1 for identifi-
cation, level 2 for coordination, level 3 for reflection, and level 4 for transformation
A third feature of learning in the proposed multiple-perspective framework is
that the latter provides multiple paths for learning real-world problem solving in
school mathematics. The mediating artifacts of the four perspectives and two con-
texts provide the learner with alternative paths of learning real-world problem solv-
ing in school mathematics. The provision of multiple paths of learning is supported
by three features of the framework: the centrality of the learners agency, the provi-
sion of many mediating artifacts belonging to well-developed perspectives
(Fig. 11.3), and the recognition of several learning mechanisms at the boundary
between real-world and school-mathematics problem solving (Fig. 11.4).
The proposed multiple-perspective framework for learning real-world problem
solving is an integrative model based on four theoretical perspectives (modeling,
narrative, critical mathematics education, ethnomathematics) and two contexts
(workplace context, STEM context). The multiple-perspective framework does not
assume or claim that it is a deterministic theory that explains and predicts real-world
problem solving in school mathematics. Rather, it is an open framework for students
and teachers to view real-world problem solving in school mathematics through
diverse lenses, each of which is based on enough theoretical and empirical knowl-
edge to offer a distinct interpretation of learning real-world problem solving in
school mathematics. The multiple-perspective framework is not intended to be
viewed as one single object, but rather a menu from which teachers, students,
schools, and teacher educators can select approaches according to their cultural
context, needs, and resources. The features of learning that the framework offers are
possibilities that may follow from the theoretical underpinnings and empirical
research associated with the four perspectives and the two contexts.

11.6 My Narrative About Learning from Writing This Book

The writing of this book was a learning activity for me at three embedded levels:
individual, collective, and interconnected. By the time I started writing, the
provisional table of contents of the book was set as a part of the proposal to the
publisher. While writing a typical chapter, I would start by letting my thinking
178 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

and imagination roam freely in the space of my experiences as a student in school

and university, a teacher and researcher, and a consultant in the field of practice.
This activity would generate some key words connected to some events in my per-
sonal experience, and these words would compete to become a tentative title for the
chapter. The title with the associated ideas, memories, and images would start shap-
ing the outcome of the object of the activity of writing the chapter. I would then
enter into a dynamic process of reflecting on how to use the artifacts that I have
accumulated through my personal and professional experiences to achieve the
object of writing the chapter. These artifacts were varied. I would invoke some
events from my student life that had some relevance to the theme, or some writing
in my papers, or some episodes from my teaching, or some anecdotes from my field
of practice. They were not all positive ideas but always had some traces in my
memory. Language was the most potent artifact because all these thoughts, memo-
ries and images had to be embodied in words in order to be communicable. At this
point, I would have the feeling that the outcome was becoming closer and more
likely to be attainable. What I had at this stage was a working title for the chapter
and some key words plus some notes. All of this served as a launching pad for the
writing of the chapter.
Writing is not only a lone activity but also a social, collective one. It is social
because the writer belongs to a social-cultural group and has in mind an audience of
possible readers. It is a collective activity because the writer, while writing, utilizes,
consciously or subconsciously, those shared and public meanings which constitute
the folk psychology (or common sense) that provides more or less the normative
description that may interpret how people feel, think, or behave in that culture
(Bruner, 1990).
My community of collaborators in writing a chapter consisted of those writers
whose work I viewed as relevant to the chapter. How did I select my community of
collaborators? I resorted to databases subscribed to by my university library and
searched for publications that matched the keywords I identified earlier as a result of
my own personal and professional experiences. The search itself was a rewarding
experience. I used the extensive facilities at my university to search for journal arti-
cles, books, and technical reports. I chose the articles based on my reading of their
abstracts, and the books and technical reports based on reading their tables of con-
tent as they appeared on the Internet. To maintain easy access to my potential col-
laborators, I obtained PDF copies of journal articles and checked out the books and
published technical reports from the library. All the PDF articles and summary notes
on books and technical reports were stored in a folder on Microsoft OneNote, which
allowed me to retrieve and work on any of the files using any communication device
whenever and wherever I wanted. Thus, members of my community of collabora-
tors were available and accessible to interact with me, at any time and in any place.
How did I interact with this community and how did the latter impact my activity
of writing? For any one chapter of the book, I read each PDF article carefully, high-
lighting what I considered of relevance to my purpose. Also I read the books and took
notes or quotations (with complete references). Some of the collected publications
did not prove relevant while others proved to be of critical importance and relevance
References 179

for my work. For each of the latter, I started searching and acquiring additional pub-
lications by the authors. For example, I discovered that I needed to deepen and
expand my knowledge of authors such as Bruner, Bourdieu, Engestrm, and Freire
by reading their original works. As a result, my search branched out in different
directions and my interaction with those new friends became intense and reward-
ing since these works enriched and sometimes transformed my thinking. My com-
munity then, was not simply a set of texts toward which I have neutral dispositions,
but rather virtual persons with whom I had established relationships of varying
degrees. The fact that some authors became closer friends than others made me
aware of their work in advancing the field; however, it did not stand in the way of my
critically interpreting their work as can be seen from many instances in the book.
The impact of introducing the community to my writing activity was reflected in
the need to recognize some kind of division of labor between me and my collabo-
rators, and also to take account of the implicit and explicit rules that governed my
interaction with my community. The division of labor centered on the question of
what and how I used the work of my collaborators to achieve my goal. The rules that
governed my interaction with my collaborators were reflected in the question of
making my writing distinct from that of my collaborators while struggling to be
truthful to their intentions. This collective activity resulted in a working mental
roadmap which took the form of a detailed outline of each chapter, in which the
ideas of each section in the chapter are closely linked to the relevant authors.
Because it focuses on learning and teaching real-world problem solving in school
mathematics, my book addresses not only mathematics education researchers, but
also mathematics education practitioners. My writing then has to go beyond the col-
lective activity of interacting with an imagined community of collaborators to
crossing the boundary between the communities of mathematics education research-
ers and practitioners. Having worked in both worlds, I hoped to be able to be suc-
cessful in crossing the boundary between them. The tools I used to cross the
boundary between theory and practice was my personal narrative. In each chapter I
include a personal narrative about my personal and professional experiences that
pertain to the issues in that chapter. The narrative is meant to give the unique per-
spective of an author who has worked in the worlds of theory and practice of learn-
ing and teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics. The cultural
historical activity theory (CHAT) proved to be a powerful tool for me not only in
providing an analytic framework for exploring real-world problem solving in school
mathematics, but also in being a tool for analyzing my personal engagement with
the way I explore, present, and communicate the issues at hand.

References

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 132169.
Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
180 11 Learning Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Minton, Balch & Company.
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engestrm, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualiza-
tion. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133156.
Engestrm, Y. (2007). Enriching the theory of expansive learning: Lessons from journeys toward
coconfiguration. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1-2), 2339.
Engestrm, Y., Engestrm, R., & Krkkinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing
in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and
Instruction, 5(4), 319336.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept
of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. R. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects:
Amateurs and professionals in Berkeleys museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social
Studies of Science, 19(3), 387420. Sage Publications, Ltd.
Suchman, L. (1994). Working relations of technology production and use. Computer Supported
Cooperative Work (CSCW), 2, 2139.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Wilson, T. D. (2006). A re-examination of information seeking behaviour in the context of activity
theory. Information Research, 11(4). Retrieved 20 Oct, 2015 from http://www.informationr.
net/ir/11-4/paper260.html.
Chapter 12
Teaching Real-World Problem Solving
in School Mathematics: A Multiple-
Perspective Framework

The social turn is intended to signal something different,

namely the emergence into the mathematics education research
community of theories that see meaning, thinking, and
reasoning as products of social activity. This goes beyond the
idea that social interactions provide a spark that generates or
stimulates an individuals internal meaning-making activity.
(Lerman, 2000, p. 23)

12.1 Paradigm Shifts in the Conception of Teaching

In the last 50 years, certain paradigm shifts have taken place in the conception of
teaching. These shifts tended to broaden the conception of teaching from a focus on
teaching of subject matter (Shulman, 1970), to a focus on contextual learning and
teaching in the larger socioeconomic context of the school (UNESCO, 2004), to a
focus on social production and reproduction of teaching and learning (Lerman,
2006). The shifts in the conception of teaching have reflected themselves in the
roles of the teacher and learner, the meaning of the subject matter, the object of
teaching, the role of social, economic, and cultural factors in shaping, and being
shaped, by teaching and learning.
Shulman (1970), whose model of instruction is depicted in Fig 12.1, reflected
the prevalent general conception of teaching dominant in the 60s of the last cen-
tury. Shulmans model featured teaching a one-directional system in which input
(entering characteristics of learners) is to produce output (objectives of instruction)
through the process of instruction. The emphasis on subject matter and teaching
are obvious from the examples given in Fig. 12.1. Also, the interaction among
type of subject matter, type of instruction, and amount and sequence of
instruction is not made explicit in this system. In addition, learners are looked at
as input and their role in the process of instruction is not made explicit. Finally, no
mention is made of the role of the broader socioeconomic and cultural context of
teaching and learning.

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 181

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2_12
182 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

1. Type of subject matter

5. Entering 2. Type of instruction 4. Objectives of

characteristics of instruction
learners 3. Amount of
instructional type and
place in instructional
sequence

Examples of each kind of variable

1. Mathematics, foreign languages, social studies (subject matter is defined in task terms)
2. Expository-discovery (degree of guidance); inductive-deductive
3. Number of minutes or hours of instruction; position in sequence of instructional types
4. Products; processes; attitudes; self-perception
5. Prior knowledge; aptitude; cognitive style; values

Fig. 12.1 Theoretical generalization about the nature of instruction (Shulman, 1970, p. 63)

The 1980s witnessed what Lerman (2000) called the social turn in mathematics
education, which he described as follows:
The social turn is intended to signal something different, namely the emergence into the
mathematics education research community of theories that see meaning, thinking, and
reasoning as products of social activity. This goes beyond the idea that social interactions
provide a spark that generates or stimulates an individuals internal meaning-making activ-
ity. (p. 23)

The social turn triggered a paradigm shift in the conception of teaching and
learning by stipulating that learning and teaching are products of social activity.
Lerman (2000) concluded that at the level of research:
we need to examine the background that frames the mathematical practices in the class-
room, irrespective of their allegiances (reform, authoritarian or other), and draw on the
resources offered by Lave, Walkerdine, Greeno and others to study the ways that school
mathematical identities are produced (p. 31).

On the practical level, the social turn did not go as far as viewing meaning,
thinking, and reasoning as products of social activity but tended to incorporate the
contextual dimension as a central dimension of teaching /learning processes. This
shift in conception was reflected in UNESCOs conception of teaching as it appeared
in its Education For All (EFA) project. UNESCOs conception of teaching is given
in Fig. 12.2, which is adapted from UNESCO (2004).
The introduction of the contextual dimension to teaching did not challenge the
one-directional system in which input (entering characteristics of learners) is to
12.2 The Conception of Teaching from an Activity-Theoretical Perspective 183

Learner Enabling Inputs

Teaching and
Learning
characteristics Teaching and outcomes
learning materials
learning Physical
Learning time infrastructure and
Teaching methods facilities
Assessment, Human resources:
feedback, teachers, principals,
incentives inspectors,
Class size supervisors,
administrators
School governance

Context

Economic and labor market Philosophical Educational knowledge National

conditions in the standpoint of teacher and support standards
community and learner infrastructure Public
Socio -cultural and religious Peer effects Public resources available expectations
factors Parental support for education Labor market
Time available for Competitiveness of the demands
schooling and teaching profession on the Globalization
homework labor market
National governance and
management strategies

Fig. 12.2 A framework for understanding education quality (UNESCO 2004, p. 36)

produce output (objectives of instruction) through the process of instruction.

However, it introduced context as a core component of instruction. As can be seen
from Fig. 12.2, the context is considered a given, which may constrain or support
the components of the system. The economic and sociocultural context may interact
with the entering characteristics of the learner. Teachers philosophy, peers, parents,
and instructional time interact with teaching and learning. Educational infrastructure,
resources, status of teaching profession in the labor market, and national governance
interact with the classroom learning environment. Also, the learning outcomes inter-
act with national standards, public expectations, labor market, and globalization.
The social turn was characterized by approaches which account for learning in
terms of internal cognitive processes, but acknowledge that cognition is influenced
by social interactions with others and, to a lesser extent, by the tools that people use
to accomplish goals (Cobb, 2006, p.189). Lerman (2006) introduced the term
strong social turn to describe theories that argued for the situatedness of knowl-
edge, of schooling as social production and reproduction, and of the development of
identity (or identities) as always implicated in learning (p. 172). The strong
sociocultural approaches followed Vygotskys argument that social and cultural
processes do not merely condition internal cognitive processes, but rather form
learners minds as the latter engage in social and cultural practices. One of the lead-
ing strong sociocultural approaches is activity theory. The conception of teaching
from an activity theoretical perspective will be presented in the next section.
184 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

12.2 The Conception of Teaching from

an Activity-Theoretical Perspective

According to Leontev (1978, 1981), activity involves a person or a group engaged in

the activity toward an object directed by a predetermined goal, using tools (artifacts)
to achieve an outcome embodying the intended goal. Leontev distinguishes among
three activity-related concepts: activity, actions, and operations, and relates these
concepts to motives, goals and the conditions under which the activity is performed.
The starting point in any activity is that the person (or persons) who engage in the
activity should have a motive without which the activity cannot be initiated. According
to Leontev (1978), unmotivated activity is activity in which the motive is subjec-
tively and objectively hidden. The motive has to be concretely translated into a pos-
sible, achievable goal. The desire to achieve this goal generates a set of actions which
constitute the activity, actions which are not random but subordinated to a conscious
purpose on the part of the person (or persons) engaged in the activity. Just as the
concept of activity is subordinate to the concept of motive, the concept of action is
subordinate to the concept of goal. Actions are mediated operationally by the arti-
facts (physical and symbolic tools) that are accessible under the objective conditions
of the specific social-cultural context in which the activity is to be realized.
Following Leontevs concept of individual activity, teaching activity is a process
by which the teacher is motivated to teach learners specific competencies by taking
actions, subordinated to the goal of teaching the intended competency, and using the
operations that are mediated, as well as constrained, by the artifacts that exist in the
objective learning environment. Thus, the activity of teaching mathematics in school
is the process by which the teacher is motivated to teach mathematical competencies
and concepts by taking actions that are consciously subordinated to the intended
mathematical goal, using the operations that are mediated and constrained by the
artifacts (physical and symbolic) that are accessible under the objective conditions
of the sociocultural context of the school involved. The top triangle in Fig. 12.3
represents the individual activity of teaching.
Individual teaching activity can only be enacted within the collective activity of
the school, which is represented by an activity system (Engestrm, 1987).
Figure 12.3 represents school teaching as an activity system. The collective activity
introduces the concept of community to the individual activity and thus triggers
profound consequences in the dynamics of the individual teaching activity. A main
consequence is the need for a division of labor among the community members
(student, school teachers and staff, parents). The division of labor is a crucial con-
cept in the collective activity which involves not only the visible role assignment
but also invisible power structures that might limit or expand students agency
during their learning process. Normally, it is the teacher who makes decisions
regarding division of labor between the teacher, the individual student, and the class
as a whole. Though they reflect the teachers pedagogic perspective, these decisions
are rooted in the teachers conception of the source and exercise of power in the
learning process.
12.3 A Multiple-Perspective Framework for Teaching Real-World Problem Solving 185

Mediating artifacts (symbolic and material

tools)

Subject Object (enabling student

(teacher) learning of curriculum)

Rules (School polices and Community (Teachers, Division of labor (Teachers,

socialnorms) administration, students) administration, students)

Fig. 12.3 School teaching as an activity system

By introducing the concept of community to the individual activity of teaching,

the need arises for rules to govern the actions and interactions within the collective
activity. These rules are of two kinds: regulatory rules, which are explicit and pub-
lic, and social and cultural norms of the broader community of the school, which
are implicit and invisible. Regularity rules deal with the governance and manage-
ment of the interactions of the other nodes of the system (subject, mediating arti-
facts, object, community, and division of labor), and their impact on teaching and
learning is direct and observable. On the other hand, social and cultural norms are
reflected in traditions, customs, habits, and beliefs. There is strong evidence from
social-cultural research that social and cultural norms mediate school teaching in a
significant way.

12.3 A Multiple-Perspective Framework for Teaching

Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

Individual teaching activity and collective teaching activity may explain teaching
school mathematics, but they do not necessarily account for teaching real-world
problem solving in school mathematics. To enable real-world problem solving to
function in school mathematics, we need to expand the activity system to interface
the two activity systems of school-mathematics problem solving and real-world
problem solving.
I propose a multiple-perspective teaching framework to correspond to the
multiple-perspective learning framework introduced in Chap. 11. Because the
proposed multiple-perspective teaching framework is based on the same premises
as the learning framework introduced in Chap. 11, its premises have to be
186 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

expressed in terms of teaching rather than learning. In fact, the first three premises
are shared by both frameworks for learning and for teaching real-world problem
solving in school mathematics, since they deal with the interconnected system
formed by interfacing the two activity systems of school-mathematics problem
solving and real-world problem solving, and not specifically with teaching or
learning. Below, the first three premises are restated as they appear for the learn-
ing framework, while the fourth and fifth premises are recontextualized to fit the
specific nature of teaching.
Premise 1: Problem solving in school mathematics and problem solving in the real
world are two distinct but interacting activity systems.
Premise 2: The sociocultural difference between the two activity systems of problem
solving in school mathematics and problem solving in the real world creates an
invisible boundary between them and thus leads to discontinuity in action or inter-
action as students move between these two worlds.
Premise 3: The two activity systems of real-world problem solving and school-
mathematics problem solving can be interfaced to form a new interconnected activ-
ity system whose shared object is learning real-world problem solving in school
mathematics.
Premise 4: To establish or restore continuity in action or interaction as stu-
dents move between the school and the real world, teachers in school need to
make an effort to enable students to cross the boundary between these two social
worlds.
Premise 5: Teaching real-world problems in school mathematics calls for the acti-
vation and use of boundary objects (mediating artifacts) and learning mechanisms
that facilitate the learning of such problem solving.

12.4 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework

for Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School
Mathematics

For the multiple-perspective teaching framework to be effective, its features need

to be aligned with the corresponding features of the multiple-perspective frame-
work for learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics. One such
feature is the centrality of the subjects agency, a key concept in activity theory
(Leontev, 1978). Learners agency entails recognition that learning is contingent
on the learners motivation, consciousness, actions, and interactions with the
social, cultural, and physical environment in which learning is taking place. On the
other hand, the teachers agency must be aligned with the learners agency because
the lack of alignment between teacher agency and student agency may jeopardize
12.4 Features of the Multiple-Perspective Framework for Teaching Real-World 187

the achievement of the object of learning real-world problem solving in school

mathematics.
A second feature of the proposed multiple-perspective framework is its develop-
mental nature, both horizontally (mode of representation of a mediating artifact)
and vertically (the learners natural or acquired readiness to engage in an artifact).
The teaching in the proposed multiple-perspective framework needs to recognize
the developmental nature of learning and to align the horizontal and vertical
sequence of instruction with the developmental nature of learning. This topic will be
revisited in more detail later in this chapter.
A third feature of the proposed teaching multiple-perspective framework is that
the latter provides multiple paths for learning real-world problem solving in school
mathematics. The teaching in the proposed multiple-perspective framework needs
to recognize the existence of these multiple paths for teaching real-world problem
solving in school mathematics, provided by the four perspectives and two contexts
and their associated artifacts that are listed in Fig 11.3 in Chap. 11. In addition to the
multiple paths provided by the artifacts for teaching real-world problem solving in
school mathematics, the framework also provides the teacher with different choices
for promoting a variety of learning mechanisms at the boundary (Fig.11.4 in
Chap. 11). This topic will be revisited in more detail later in this chapter.

Instructional objective level 1- Identification

Enabling students to become aware of identifying real world problem solving as

different from, yet co-existent, with school mathematics problem solving.

Instructional outcome level 2- Coordination

Enabling students to translate real world problems into school mathematics

problems.

Instructional objective level 3- Reflection

Facilitating student reflection on real world problem solving by encouraging their

perspective-making of school mathematics problem solving and perspective-taking
of real world problem solving.

Instructional objectivelevel 4- Transformation

Facilitating the development of student ability and disposition to engage in

authentic real world problem solving that leads in turn to new boundary practices of
solving real world problem solving in school mathematics.

Fig. 12.4 Instructional objectives of teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics
188 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

12.5 Instructional Objectives of Teaching Real-World

Problem Solving in School Mathematics

The object of the teaching framework proposed is to enable students to learn

real-world problem solving in school mathematics. However, learning/teaching
real-world problem solving in school mathematics occurs at different levels along
two dimensions: student cognitive functioning and the extent to which teaching is
explicit in mediating the real world. The learning mechanisms identified by
Akkerman and Bakker (2011) for learning on the boundary (see Fig. 11.4 for a sum-
mary) provide a basis for characterizing the level of student cognitive functioning.
The four learning mechanisms they identify are identification, coordination, reflec-
tion, and transformation. These four learning mechanisms are in increasing order of
the degree of student cognitive engagement with the real world. Identification
involves processes that define one practice (in this case school problem solving) in
light of another (in this case real-world problem solving), delineating how the one
differs from the other. Cognitively, identification requires recognition of the distinc-
tions between school-mathematics and real-world problem solving. Instructional
objective level 1 (Fig. 12.4) belongs to identification since it aims at developing the
ability of students to become aware of real-world problem solving as distinct but
coexisting with school-mathematics problem solving.
Coordination requires translation between the different worlds (school-mathematics
and real-world problem solving), and as such it cognitively requires comprehension,
which is at a higher cognitive level than identification. Obviously instructional objec-
tive level 2 (Fig. 12.4) belongs to this category. Reflection, on the other hand, requires
formulation of the distinctive perspectives (perspective-making: making explicit ones
understanding of school-mathematics problem solving; and perspective-taking: tak-
ing into account problem solving in the real world, in light of a reflexive knowledge
of ones school-mathematics problem solving). Instructional objective level 3
(Fig. 12.4) belongs to reflection. Transformation requires metacognitive processes,
which make it higher cognitively than reflection. Transformation leads to profound
changes in problem solving practices, potentially even the creation of a new boundary
practice of solving real-world problems in school mathematics. Transformation
requires the ability and disposition to understand and act in the shared space of real-
world problem solving in school mathematics. As such, transformation is the highest
cognitive level of functioning in learning real-world problem solving in school math-
ematics. Instructional objective level 4 (Fig. 12.4) belongs to transformation.
A second issue is the degree to which the teacher explicitly builds mediation of
the real world in teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics.
According to Wertsch (2007) mediation involves our contact with the world
(p. 179), which is demonstrated by either explicit or implicit intervention. Explicit
intervention is defined as when an individual, or another person who is directing
this individual, overtly and intentionally introduces a stimulus means into an ongo-
ing stream of activity (p. 180) compared to implicit mediation, which is not the
object of conscious reflection. [but is] automatically and in most cases, uninten-
tionally built into mental functioning (p. 184). Both identification and coordination
12.6 Vertical Sequencing Instruction in Real-World Problem Solving in School 189

require overt and intentional elements of real-world problem solving, and hence
they are classified as external mediation. On the other hand, reflection and transfor-
mation are not necessarily the result of explicit intentional stimulus by the teacher
but rather of complex cognitive functioning on the part of learners.

12.6 Vertical Sequencing Instruction in Real-World Problem

Solving in School Mathematics

Sequencing instruction in school mathematics for promoting real-world problem

solving needs to take into account the assumption of the multiple-perspective learn-
ing framework regarding the developmental nature of learning world problem solv-
ing in school mathematics. In Chap. 11 (Sect. 11.5), the concepts of the vertical and
horizontal developmental nature of learning real-world problem solving are intro-
duced. Vertical development addresses the question of which mediating artifact
(boundary object) is optimal for which grade level. Horizontal development addresses
the question of sequencing learning in terms of increasing cognitive demand due to
increasing engagement with the real world. Vertical development reflects itself in the
sequence of using the mediating artifacts in sequencing instruction in real-world
problem solving in school mathematics, across grade levels. Horizontal development
reflects itself in sequencing problem tasks, within a grade level, in terms of the cog-
nitive demand due to increasing engagement with the real world.
Sequencing the artifacts by grade level is mainly based on the assumed readiness
of a certain grade level student to engage in using these artifacts. The readiness of a
student is determined by what is known about their knowledge, understanding, expe-
riences, and intellectual developmental on the one hand and by the nature of the
artifacts as conceptualized and/or used in research on the other hand. The assumption
is that the readiness of a group of students in a certain school in a certain sociocul-
tural context may be estimated roughly to be within a range of knowledge, experi-
ences, and abilities. The best person to make that estimate is the teacher involved.
The recommended optimal sequence of instruction according to the use of per-
spective/context is: modeling/narrative, ethnomathematics/STEM context, and crit-
ical mathematics education/work context. As shown in Fig. 12.5, the artifacts
belonging to modeling and narrative are recommended for elementary and lower
secondary grades rather than in the upper secondary because modeling (describing
real-world relationships using mathematical language) and narrative (using lan-
guage to describe personal experiences) are core organizing principles in elemen-
tary school. The artifacts belonging to ethnomathematics and STEM contexts are
recommended for lower and upper secondary grades rather than the elementary
because they require higher cognitive skills and more experience in recognizing
cultural practices or science, technology and engineering concepts than one would
not expect in the elementary grades. However, the artifacts belonging to critical
mathematics education/work contexts are more suited for upper secondary grades
because of the sophistication of workplace mathematical practices and of the
demands of developing critical consciousness of social issues.
190 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

Perspective/context Mediating artifact Grade level

E LS US
Modeling 1. Re-contextualizing Word problems as modeling R
practices
2. Interpreting technology-produced mathematical R R
outputs
3. Emergent modeling R
4. Model-Eliciting Activities(MEA) R R
Narrative 1. Expanded Polyas framework of problem solving R
2. Journal writing about real world problem solving R R
3. Modeling narratives R
4. Historical narratives about mathematics-making R

Ethnomathematics 1. Problematization of ethnomathematical practices R R R

2. Exploration of historical culturally-specific R R
problems
3. Student ethno-mathematical research project R
STEM context 1.Model-Eliciting Activities(MEA) R R
2. STEM project-based learning (PBL) R R
3. Mathematics Studio R R R
Critical 1. Critical mathematics education project R R
mathematics 2. Critical reflection on mathematical practices R R
education
Workplace context 1. Workplace routines as school problems R R
2. Case study investigation R
3. Joint school-workplace focus group R
R
4. Technical training workshop

Fig. 12.5 Recommended sequence of use of perspectives/contexts and the artifacts within each
Note. E stands for elementary (grades 16); LS for lower secondary (grades 79); US for upper
secondary (grades 1012); R stands for recommended artifact for that grade level

12.7 Horizontal Sequencing of Problem Tasks in Teaching

Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

One major determinant of the sequence of problem tasks is the degree of student
engagement in elements of the real world. This section demonstrates the horizontal
sequencing of problem tasks based on the four hierarchical levels of engaging stu-
dents in real-world problem solving in school mathematics: identification, transla-
tion, reflection, and transformation. Example 1 is a problem that serves the
instructional objective level 1-identification (Fig. 12.4) since it aims at identifying
real-world problem solving as different from and coexistent with school-mathemat-
ics problem solving (external mediation). Its main focus is raising awareness of the
differences between problem solving in the two sociocultural contexts.
12.7 Horizontal Sequencing of Problem Tasks in Teaching Real-World Problem 191

Example 1: Problem task for instructional objective level 1-identification

JFK problem
You need to arrive at JFK international airport at 7 PM to pick up a friend. At 4 PM,
you left for the airport that is 180 miles away. You drove the first 60 miles in an hour.
Your friend called you and asked if you can be on time. How would you respond?
(Inoue, 2005, p. 73)
If the same thing happened to you, would you behave in the same way in real life as you
did in solving the problem? Why? (p. 74)

Research has addressed the unrealistic answers given by students particularly

in word problems, and generally confirmed that school-aged children have a strong
tendency to solve mathematical word problems by mechanically calculating num-
bers even if their calculated answers seem unrealistic (Inoue, 2005). However, the
unrealistic answers may not be unrealistic at all, but may stem from a realistic
effort to adapt to the sociocultural norm of schooling. In a study involving under-
graduate students, Inoue (2005) reported that many of the students could justify
their unrealistic responses with sensible rationales. For example, the following
realistic interpretations/justifications were given when students were interviewed
and asked to solve the JFK problem in the real life:
I will say Yes, because:
You can increase the speed in the middle by expecting a traffic jam.
Ill do my best, but planes often arrive late.
I may be late, but my friend would not be upset even if I am late.
What I meant was an estimate.
Traffic jams depend on the day.
On Sundays, its OK.
After the plane gets to the airport, it takes an extra 45 min for him to come out.
(Inoue, 2005, p. 77)
Word problems of this kind can serve the instructional objective of level
1-identification if students are pressed to justify and interpret their answers in the
context of the real world. The instructional design that suits the teaching of such
problems would be the expanded Polya framework, which belongs to the narrative
perspective. The power of this approach is that it can be applied on existing text-
book problems with follow up questions about their solutions in the real world.
Example 2: Problem task for instructional objective level 2-coordination
Ahmeds solution of finding the cost of 4 kilos of cucumbers, 1250 lira/kilo, involved an
application of additive distribution. He said:4 kilos, say in 4000 lira and then 4 of 250 lira
makes 1000 lira hence the answer is 5000 lira.
How would solve the same problem using school mathematics? (Jurdak & Shahin,
1999, p. 162)

Example 2 is a problem task that serves instructional objective level 2-coordina-

tionis (Fig. 12.4) since it aims at translating a real-world problem into school-math-
ematics problems. Its main focus is to establish communication between problem
solving in the two sociocultural contexts of school mathematics and the real world.
The instructional design that suits the teaching of such problems would be the mod-
eling narrative artifact which belongs to the narrative perspective.
192 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

Fig. 12.6 Map of Lebanon

Example 3: Problem task for instructional objective level 3-reflection

RasamnyYouniss Company is making a special offer on Nissan-Almercars, model 1999, and
automatic/full option for $13950. Now, you have two options for payment in installments,
either through the bank or through the company itself. Through the bank, and with a down
payment of $5000, you can pay with a 12 % annual interest on the balance, $305 at the end of
each month. However, the second option, and with a down payment of $5,000 you can repay,
in equal monthly installments for 36 months at an annual interest rate of 7.5 % on the total.
(1) Suppose you wanted to pay the whole remaining amount after 6 months. In each
option, how much do you have to pay to close your account?
(2) Which is the most convenient option for paying for the car? (Jurdak, 2006, p. 298)

Example 3 is a problem task that serves instructional objective level 3-reflection

(Fig. 12.4) since it aims at enabling student to formulate two distinctive perspectives:
perspective-making by explicitly demonstrating ones understanding of school-
mathematics problem solving; and perspective-taking by accounting for problem
solving in the real world, in light of a reflexive knowledge of ones school-mathemat-
ics problem solving. The problem task is a simulated real-world problem in the sense
that the problem task is an actual real-world task, which requires perspective-taking
on the part student; however, the questions were framed in school-mathematics
12.8 Epilogue 193

language, which requires perspective-making on the part of students since it involves

the demonstration of student understanding of school mathematics. Modeling and
narrative artifacts would be suitable for such problems.
Example 4: Problem task for instructional objective level 4-transformation
Below is a map of Lebanon (Fig. 12.6). A hot political issue in Lebanon is the way Lebanon
is divided into electoral zones. We want to divide Lebanon into six electoral zones with
their centers Beirut (capital); and governorate capitals Tripoli, Baabda, Zahle, Sidon, and
Nabatiyya (blue rectangles). The zoning is to be made according to the following criterion:
A village or town or city is in a zone X if it is closer to the center of zone X than to any of
the centers of the other five zones.
Your task is to determine and draw the boundaries of each of the five zones. You have to
submit a report to include: (a) the map of Lebanon with the boundaries of the six zones
drawn, (b) justification of the boundaries in terms of the above set condition, (c) your per-
sonal opinion about the political implications in terms of political fairness, (d) feasibility of
implementation.

This problem is a project which I have used with my secondary mathematics stu-
dent-teachers for many years. It lends itself to be a capstone group project for a semes-
ter or an academic year. Example 4 serves instructional objective level 4-transformation
(Fig. 12.4) since it aims at profound changes in problem solving practices, including
the creation of a new boundary practice of real-world problem solving in school math-
ematics. As a transformation task, this project requires as well as develops abilities
and dispositions to understand and act in the shared space of real-world problem solv-
ing in school mathematics. It also lends itself to many of learning/teaching including
most of the mediating including artifacts belonging to modeling, narrative, and criti-
cal mathematics education,
My experience indicates that students find this project challenging, though it is
based on an elementary mathematical concept. It also allows for a variety of approaches:
from the naive solution of measuring the distances of those towns and cities that appear
on the map and making decisions accordingly to using advanced statistical analysis.
Also the reports have different levels of sophistication and critical thinking.
The multiple-perspective teaching framework is more of an invitation than a pre-
scription. It is an invitation to a menu of instructional strategies from which stu-
dents, teachers, and schools can choose. The choices can vary from simple strategies
that can be embedded in regular classroom problem solving activities to more
involved capstone projects that require favorable policies, adequate resources, and
committed and motivated teachers. In summary, the teacher agency in choosing,
implementing, and appropriating the level of adoption of the multiple-perspective
framework for teaching real-world problem solving in school mathematics depends
on the resources and constraints of the learning/teaching context.

12.8 Epilogue

As my journey with writing this book comes to an end, I would like to reflect on that
experience from my present perspective. If there is one word that epitomizes this
journey, it is the word integrationintegration at the personal, epistemological
194 12 Teaching Real-World Problem Solving in School Mathematics

and discourse levels. At the personal level, my journey in writing this book provided
me many opportunities to make and remake my personal and professional identities.
As I got involved in reading the literature for a chapter, I experienced identity shifts
as I interacted with the different perspectives of the researchers in that chapter. This
process of identity making/remaking resulted from conflicts between what I know
and what I was reading, and the different perspectives of the researchers themselves.
The process of identity making/remaking arrived at temporary stability when I was
able to integrate the different perspectives by writing a draft of the chapter. The
integration of the different perspectives across the different chapters of the book
constituted the second phase of the process of identity making/remaking, which
reached its final stable stage by developing the multiple-perspective framework for
learning real-world problem solving in school mathematics in Chap. 11. Another
level of integration at the personal level was the integration between the theoretical
knowledge in each chapter and my own experiences as a mathematics educator. In
many cases, theoretical perspectives were inspiring at the conceptual level but unre-
alistic at the operational level. This triggered a conflict between my inspiration by
the theoretical perspectives and my personal professional beliefs which were shaped
by tens of years of school and university professional practices. These conflicts are
partially resolved in each chapter by tentatively accommodating some of these theo-
retical practices into my professional belief system.
One of the most difficult challenges I faced was the integration, at the knowl-
edge level, of the different theoretical perspectives and contexts that I selected for
the multiple-perspective framework I intended to develop. To attain this integra-
tion, I had to undergo a major conceptual transformation. Initially, I intended to
develop a theory of instruction, and the title of the book I proposed to the publisher
was Teaching Real World Problem Solving in School Mathematics: Toward a
Theory of Instruction. My initial idea was to integrate these different perspectives
under an umbrella of a set of common assumptions and premises. As I progressed
through writing, I realized that the concept of theory was not only impossible but
also undesirable. To find the commonalty among those diverse perspectives in
terms of their assumptions and goals was very difficult, if not, impossible. Even if
this could be done, the commonality among those perspectives would be too thin to
be meaningful and too abstract to inform teaching and learning of real-world prob-
lem solving. After a long and difficult process of soul searching and reflection, I
came to the conviction that transformed my conception of integration. Instead of
developing a theory by identifying commonalities and obscuring the unique ele-
ments of these perspectives, I decided to develop a framework which maintained
the identity and integrity of those multiple perspectives. Thus, those perspectives
are integrated in the sense that they view the same object (solving real-world prob-
lems) from different vantage points (perspectives). The multiple-perspective
approach to learning and teaching real-world problem solving in school mathemat-
ics was a way to enhance student and teacher agency, while protecting them from a
theoretical deterministic interpretation which would have little use in learning and
teaching in the real world. The integration of the theoretical perspectives, at both
the personal and epistemological levels, reached its final stage in the development
References 195

of the multiple-perspective framework for learning and teaching real-world prob-

lem solving in school mathematics in Chaps. 11 and 12.
The third type of integration I experienced was the one between public shared
discourse and personal discourse. The first type of discourse told the shared and
public story of known ideas related to real-world problem solving in school math-
ematics; on the other hand, the second type of discourse told the personal story of
events, people, and experiences related to real-world problem solving in school
mathematics. For the first time in my career, I have had the opportunity to reconcile
those two types of discourse in one scholarly publication. The narrative that I
included in every chapter on my personal and professional experiences as a student,
teacher, or researcher has, besides offering an outlet for expressing a repressed liter-
ary tendency since my youth, helped me also make explicit the links between my
public scholarly space represented by my publications and teaching, and my private
space represented by events, people, and experiences that helped shape my public
scholarly life. The integration of my public and private discourses was a therapeutic
tool that enabled me to gain a more intimate understanding of the ideas and how
they came into being.

References

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of
Educational Research, 81(2), 132169.
Cobb, P. (2006). Mathematics Learning as a social practice. In J. Maasz & W. Schloeglmann
(Eds.), New mathematics education research and practice (pp. 147152). Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental
research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Inoue, N. (2005). The realistic reasons behind unrealistic solutions: The role of interpretive activity
in word problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 15(1), 6983.
Jurdak, M. (2006). Contrasting perspectives and performance of high school students on problem
solving in real world, situated, and school contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(3),
283301.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (1999). An ethnographic study of the computational strategies of a group
of young street vendors in Beirut. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 155172.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept
of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 3771). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Lerman, S. (2000). The social turn in mathematics education research. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple
perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 1944). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Lerman, S. (2006). Cultural psychology, anthropology and sociology: The developing strong
social turn. In J. Maasz & W. Schloeglmann (Eds.), New mathematics education research and
practice (pp. 171188). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Shulman, L. S. (1970). Psychology and mathematics education. In E. Begle (Ed.), Mathematics
education (pp. 2371). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
UNESCO. (2004). Global monitoring report, Education For All (EFA): The quality imperative.
Paris: UNESCO.
Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In M. Daniels, M. Cole, & J.V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge
companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178192). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Index

A project, 116117
Acculturation, 19, 2728, 130 reflection, 118120
Activity Skovsmose, Ole, 71, 110112, 115, 117
collective learning, 171172 Culture
cultural-historical process, 53 activity-theoretic view, 1012
individual learning, 169170 narrative view, 710
interconnected activity systems, 11, 49, 51,
6176, 142, 172174, 186
psychological process, 5253 E
system, 1012, 14, 4951, 53, 5559, Epilogue, 193195
6365, 6769, 74, 76, 119, 138, Ethnomathematics
139, 141143, 145, 167, 168, 170, foundational issues, 121123
172, 173, 184186 historical culturally-specific problems, 130
systematic-structural process, 5354 interface, 129131
theory, 3, 6, 7, 1015, 4976, 119, 142, practices, 127128
148, 170, 173, 176, 183, 186 problematization, 130
transformation process, 53 problem solving, 128129
relation to critical mathematics education,
126127
B relation to mathematics education,
Boundary 123125
crossing, 49, 6369, 74, 141, 142, 167, research project, 131
172, 173
object, 6567, 6974, 86, 87, 101, 103,
104, 116, 130, 131, 141143, 146, F
147, 158, 160, 167, 172, 173, 176, Formal schooling
186, 189 critical perspective, 20
cultural production perspective, 2526
deschooling perspective, 2223
C emancipatory perspective, 2021
Critical mathematics education personalized perspective, 2324
Freires emancipatory education, 109110 socialization perspective, 22
interface, 116118 social mobility perspective, 2122
problem solving, 115116 use value of, 2627

Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 197

M. Jurdak, Learning and Teaching Real World Problem
Solving in School Mathematics, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08204-2
198 Index

L N
Learning real world problem solving Narrative
boundary objects, 174175 epistemological drama, 9596
learning mechanisms, 175 historical, 104, 174, 190
multi-perspective frame work, 172, human-making experience, 94
175177 interface, 101104
premises, 172173 life experience, 9697
Literacy mathematics-making, 9497
autonomous model, 34 modeling, 104
critical, 3536 narrative mode, 5, 6, 70, 93106
cultural capital, 3637 paradigmatic mode, 5
ideological model, 3435 polya expanded model, 101103
UNESCO, 4243

P
M Problem solving
Mathematical literacy journal writing, 103
autonomous, 3839 life experience, 9697
critical, 4041 narrative, 9798
cultural capital, 4142 paradigmatic, 100101
ideological, 3940
Mathematics studio, 158160
Model-eliciting activities (MEA), 8889, 153, R
159, 160, 174, 190 Reality
Modeling activity-theoretic account, 67
black-boxing, 87 constitution of, 67
emergent, 8788 narrative account of, 56
epistemic practice, 81 views of, 35
interface, 8689 Real world, 316, 19, 4976, 7991, 93106,
mathematical practice, 8081 109133, 137148, 151162,
perspectives, 7980, 83, 86 167179, 181195
real world problem solving, 8286 Real world problem solving
school mathematics problem solving, collective activity, 55
8689 individual activity, 5455
My narrative interfacing with school mathematics,
about activity theory, 7476 6264
about ethnomathematics, 131133
about learning from writing, 177179
about mathematical literacy, 4345 S
about narrative, 104106 School, 3, 1931, 34, 4976, 82, 98,
about school, culture, and society, 2831 109, 123, 137, 151, 167179,
about STEM, 161162 181195
about the real world, 1416 School mathematics problem solving
about workplace mathematics, 147148 collective activity, 57
My reflection, 118120 individual activity, 5557
on critical mathematics education, interfacing with real world problem
118120 solving, 6264
My story, 8991 Science, technology, engineering, and
with modeling, 8991 mathematics (STEM)
Index 199

curriculum, 154156 paradigm shifts, 181183

integrative objects, 156158 vertical sequencing, 189190
interface with school, 158160
literacy, 152
pedagogy, 152153 W
project-based learning, 159 Word problems, 60, 70, 82, 83, 129, 174,
Society, 10, 11, 1931, 34, 37, 41, 43, 45, 176, 191
62, 109111, 125, 126, 132, 133, modeling, 8687, 190
137 Workplace
Subjectification, 142 case study investigation, 145146
focus group, 146
interface with school, 141142
T problem solving, 140141
Teaching real world problem solving routines as problems, 143145
horizontal sequencing, 190193 and school, 137140
multi-perspective frame work, 185187 workshop, 146147
objectives, 188189 World view, 1214