Multilingual Approach to Mathematics Education

Abstract

Multilingual approach to pedagogical practices in mathematics has the potential to target high level mathematical competence and abstraction. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an innovative educational approach to learning, a dynamic and motivating force with holistic features. Not only does it image a shift towards curricular and cultural integration but also helps greatly to focus on deeper conceptual understanding in Mathematics. CLIL’s basic principle of integration of the content and languages if accepted in a broader sense as ‘Content connected to regional language and a new language, culture, nature, real-life’ might solve various problems associated with the teaching-learning of mathematics, and thus ensures to support ‘learning for real life’. This paper establishes the need for ‘Multilingualism’ through a comprehensive literature research. It highlights multilingualism as a trigger for active approach to the quality of Mathematics education, mainly in Indian scenario. The importance of teaching mathematics as a language and specific strategies for teaching mathematics vocabulary are discussed. The illustrations provided for such approaches are entirely based on author’s teaching experiences.

  • Page Number : 71-86

  • Published Date : 2019-09-04

  • Keywords
    CLIL, Plurilingualism, Singapore BAR Model method

  • DOI Number
    https://doi.org/10.15415/iie.2019.72008

  • Authors

    • Shailaja BairyMadhava Kripa School, Manipal, Karnataka-576104, India; Department of European Studies, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka-576104, India

References

  • Adler, J. (1996). Secondary School Teacher’s’ Knowledge of the Dynamics of Teaching and Learning Mathematics in Multilingual Classrooms. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Johannesburg, University of the Witwatersrand.
  • Adler, J. (1998). A Language of Teaching Dilemmas: Unlocking the Complex Multilingual Secondary Mathematics Classroom. For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1), 24-33.
  • Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Hornberger, Nancy, H., & Baker, C. (Eds), 3rd edition. Retrieved from http://www.multilingual-matters.com
  • Benson, C. (2004). The Importance of mother tongue based schooling for educational quality. Columbia University. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000146632
  • Benson, C. (2016). Addressing language of instruction issues in education: Recommendations for documenting progress. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000245575
  • Brantlinger, A. (2014). Critical mathematics discourse in a high school classroom: Examining patterns of student engagement and resistance. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(2), 201-220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9506-2
  • Brune, I.H. (1953). Language in Mathematics, In: The Learning of Mathematics: Its Theory and Practice. Washington, NTCM.
  • Chandler-Olcott, K., Doerr, H.M., Hinchman, K.A., & Masingila, J.O. (2015). Bypass, Augment, or Integrate: How Secondary Mathematics Teachers Address the Literacy Demands of Standards-Based Curriculum Materials. Journal of Literacy Research, 47(4) 439– 472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X16632040
  • Cooke, B.D., & Buchholz, D. (2005). Mathematical Communication in the Classroom: A Teacher Makes a Difference. Early Childhood Education Journal, 32(6), 365-369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-005-0007-5
  • Darhower, M. (2002). Interactional features of synchronous computer-mediated communication in the intermediate L2 class: A sociocultural case study. CALICO Journal, 19(2), 249-278. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v19i2.249-277
  • De Craen, P.V., Surmont, J., Knell, G., Stroughmayer, M., & Struys, E. (2017). CLIL, languages of schooling and the role of implicit learning with special reference to the learning of mathematics. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2017-0027
  • DiCerbo, P.A., Anstrom, K.A., Baker, L.L., & Rivera, C. (2014). A Review of the Literature on Teaching Academic English to English Language Learners. Review of educational research, 84(3), 446-482. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314532695
  • Gardella, F.J., & Tong, V. (2002). Linguistic considerations in the acquisition and teaching of mathematics. Word, 53(2), 185-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2002.11432527
  • Glasersfeld, E.V. (1995). A constructivist approaches to teaching. In: Steffe L.P. & Gale J (eds). Constructivism in education. Erlbaum, Hillsdale: 3–15. Available at http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/172
  • Hejny, M. (2012). Exploring the Cognitive Dimension of Teaching Mathematics through Scheme-oriented Approach to Education. Orbis Scholae, 6(2), 41−55. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2015.39
  • Henry, D.L., Nistor, N., & Baltes, B. (2014). Examining the Relationship Between Math Scores and English Language Proficiency. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 4(1), 11–29.
  • Hofmannova, M., Novotna, J. & Moschkovich, J., (2004). Working with theories from outside mathematics education. In: 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 229-235.
  • John-Steiner, V., & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development-A Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 191-206.
  • Lee, C. (2006). Language for Learning Mathematics–Assessment for Learning in practice, Open University Press, McGraw-Hill Education (England).
  • Marsh, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)-A Development Trajectory. University of Córdoba. Retrieved from www.uco.es/publicaciones
  • Marsh, D., & Martín, M.J.F. (2012). Introduction: Content and Language Integrated Learning. University of Jyvaskyla, Finland, & Valencian International University, Spain.
  • Mehisto, P. (2008). CLIL Counterweights: Recognizing and Decreasing Disjuncture in CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 93-119.
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development (2019). National Education Policy, (479 pages). Retrieved from https://mhrd.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/Draft_NEP_2019_EN_Revised.pdf
  • Mishra, P., & Mehta, R. (2017). What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning: Results of a Survey. Journal of Digital learning in Teacher education, 33(1), 6-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2016.1242392
  • Moe, E. (2017). The language of schooling: A challenge to subject learning. Bergen language and Linguistics Studies, 7, 234–259. https://doi.org/10.15845/bells.v7i0
  • Molina, C., & Wackwitz, J. (2012). The Problem with Math Is English: A Language- Focused Approach to Helping All Students Develop a Deeper Understanding of Mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/catalog/items/ms108.html.
  • Molina, C.“Como”, (2014). Teaching Mathematics Conceptually. SEDL Insights, 1(4), 1-8. Retrieved from http://www.sedl.org/insights/1-4/teaching_mathematics_conceptually.pdf.
  • Moschkovich, J. (2005). Using Two Languages When Learning Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64, 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-9005-1
  • Nacamulli, M. (2017). The benefits of a bilingual brain. TED Talk. Dec 11, 2017. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/mia_nacamulli_the_benefits_of_a_bilingual_brain?language=en
  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (2018). English Learners in STEM Subjects: Transforming Classrooms, Schools, and Lives. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25182
  • National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved from https://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Principles-and-Standards/
  • National Council of Teacher of Mathematics (2013). What Does Research Say the Benefits of Discussion in mathematics Class Are?, 1-6.
  • Novotna, J. & Hofmannova, M. (2002). CLIL and mathematics education. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228491266_CLIL_and_mathematics_education
  • Piccardo, E. (2013). Plurilingualism and Curriculum Design: Toward a Synergic Vision. Tesol Quarterly, 47(3), 600-614. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.110
  • Piccardo, E. (2017). Plurilingualism as a Catalyst for Creativity in Super diverse Societies: A Systemic Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2169. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02169
  • Pimm, D., & Keynes, Milton. (1994). Mathematics classroom language: Form, Function and Force. In: Didactics of Mathematics as a scientific discipline.
  • Riccomini, P.J., Smith, G.W., Hughes, E.M., & Fries, K.M. (2015). The Language of Mathematics: The Importance of Teaching and Learning Mathematical Vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31(3), 235-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030995
  • Sarama, J., Lange, A.A., Clements, D.H., & Wolfe, C.B. (2011). The impacts of an early mathematics curriculum on oral language and literacy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(2012), 489–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.12.002
  • Setati, M. (1998). Code-switching in a Senior Primary Class of Second-language Mathematics Learners. For the Learning of Mathematics, 18(1), 34-40.
  • Star, J.R., & Stylianides, G.J. (2012). Procedural and Conceptual Knowledge: Exploring the Gap Between Knowledge Type and Knowledge Quality. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 13(2), 169-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2013.784828
  • The National Research Council of the national academies (2012). Education for life and work - Guide for Practitioners. (pp.18-21). Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/resource/13398/dbasse_084153.pdf
  • Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cole, M., Steiner, V.J., Scribner, S., Souberman, E. (Eds). Harvard University Press
  • Wade-Leeuwen, B., & Vovers, J., & Silk, M. (2018). Education: Explainer: What’s the difference between STEM and STEAM. npj Science of Learning Community. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/explainer-whats-the-difference-between-stemand-steam-95713
  • Weiler, N. (2016). Crosstalk between left and right brain is the key to language development. The official journal of the university of California, San Francisco. (2016 issue). Retrieved from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2016-05-crosstalk-left-brain-key-language.html
  • Zazkis, R. (2000). Using Code-Switching as a Tool for Learning Mathematical Language, For the Learning of Mathematics, 20(3), 38-43.