Identificación de las estructuras de autoridad en el discurso del aula matemática: las primeras experiencias de un profesor en un contexto nuevo

Referencias

Alrø, H., y Skovsmose, O. (2004).Dialogue and learning in mathematics education:Intention, reflection, critique(Vol. 29). Springer Science & Business Media.Amit, M., y Fried, M. N. (2005). Authority and authority relations in mathematicseducation: A view from an 8th grade classroom.Educational studies inMathematics,58(2), 145–168.Biber, D., Conrad, S., y Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at...: Lexical bundles inuniversity teaching and textbooks.Applied linguistics,25(3), 371–405.Bishop, A. (2004).Mathematical enculturation. A cultural perspective on mathematicseducation. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Boaler, J. (2003). (Ed.). EnStudying and capturing the complexity of practice—the case ofthe “dance of agency”: Proceedings of the 27 th Conference of the International Groupfor the Psychology of Mathematics Education held jointly with the 25th Conferenceof PME-NA, Honolulu, Hawaii (Vol. I)(pp. 3–16).Cobb, P., Yackel, E., y Wood, T. (1993). Theoretical orientation. En D. Dillon(Ed.),Rethinking elementary school mathematics: Insights and issues, Monograph#6.NCTM: Reston, VA.Revista de Educación Matemática, Vol. 37 N°3 – 2022 Identificación de las estructuras de autoridad en el discurso del aula de matemática...31Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2009). Negotiation of the “presence of the text”: Howmight teachers’ language choices influence the positioning of the textbook?En J. Remillard, B. Herbel-Eisenmann, y G. Lloyd (Eds.),Mathematics teachersat work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction(p. 134–151).New York: Routledge.Herbel-Eisenmann, B., y Wagner, D. (2010). Appraising lexical bundles inmathematics classroom discourse: Obligation and choice.Educational Studiesin Mathematics,75(1), 43–63.Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Wagner, D., y Cortes, V. (2010). Lexical bundle analysisin mathematics classroom discourse: The significance of stance.EducationalStudies in Mathematics,75(1), 23–42.Hufferd-Ackles, K., Fuson, K. C., y Sherin, M. G. (2004). Describing levelsand components of a math-talk learning community.Journal for researchin mathematics education,35(2), 81.Martin, J. R., y White, P. R. (2005).The language of evaluation: appraisal in English(Vol. 2). Nueva York: Palgrave.Morgan, C. (1998).Writing mathematically: The discourse of ’investigation’. Bristol,PA: Falmer Press.Oyler, C. (1996).Making Room for Students: Sharing Teacher Authority in Room 104.Nueva York: Teachers College Press.Pace, J. L. (2003). Using ambiguity and entertainment to win compliance in alower-level US history class.Journal of Curriculum Studies,35(1), 83–110.Pace, J. L., y Hemmings, A. (2007). Understanding authority in classrooms: Areview of theory, ideology, and research.Review of educational research,77(1),4–27.Pickering, A. (1995).The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. University ofChicago Press.Pimm, D. (2019).Speaking mathematically. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Rittenhouse, P. S. (1998). The teacher’s role in mathematical conversation: Steppingin and stepping out. En Lampert y Blunk (Eds.),Talking mathematics inschool: Studies of teaching and learning(pp. 163–189). Nueva York: CambridgeUniversity Press.Roesken, B., Hannula, M. S., y Pehkonen, E. (2011). Dimensions of students’ viewsof themselves as learners of mathematics.ZDM,43(4), 497–506.Rowland, T. (1992). Pointing with pronouns.For the Learning of Mathematics,12(2),44–48.Schoenfeld, A. (1992). Reflections on doing and teaching mathematics. EnA. Schoenfeld (Ed.),Mathematical thinking and problem solving(pp. 53–70).Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Skemp, R. R. (1980). Intelligence, learning and action.British Journal of EducationalStudies,28(3).Revista de Educación Matemática, Vol. 37 N°3 – 2022 32D. Wagner y B. Herbel-EisenmannSkovsmose, O. (2001). Landscapes of investigation.Zentralblatt für Didaktik derMathematik,33(4), 123–132.Wagner, D. (2012). Opening mathematics texts: Resisting the seduction.EducationalStudies in Mathematics,80(1), 153–169.Wagner, D., y Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2008). “Just don’t”: The suppression andinvitation of dialogue in the mathematics classroom.Educational Studies inMathematics,67(2), 143–157.Wagner, D., y Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2009). Re-mythologizing mathematicsthrough attention to classroom positioning.Educational Studies in Mathematics,72(1), 1–15.Yackel, E., y Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, andautonomy in mathematics.Journal for research in mathematics education,27(4),458–477.Yin, R. (2006). Case Study Methods. En J. Green, G. Camilli, y P. Elmore(Eds.),Handbook of Complementary Methods in Education Research(pp. 111–122).Mahwah, NJ: LEA & AERA.