Research in Mathematics Education

ISSN: 1479-4802 (Print) 1754-0178 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rrme20

Exploring the nature and coherence of

mathematical work in South African Mathematical
Literacy classrooms
Hamsa Venkat
To cite this article: Hamsa Venkat (2010) Exploring the nature and coherence of mathematical
work in South African Mathematical Literacy classrooms, Research in Mathematics Education,
12:1, 53-68, DOI: 10.1080/14794800903569865
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14794800903569865

Published online: 12 Feb 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 120

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rrme20
Download by: [Solun Say]

Date: 14 October 2015, At: 10:51

Research in Mathematics Education

Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2010, 53
68

Exploring the nature and coherence of mathematical work

in South African Mathematical Literacy classrooms
Hamsa Venkat*

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Marang Centre for Mathematics and Science Education, University of the Witwatersrand,
Johannesburg, South Africa
In this paper the mathematical working in a series of litter project lessons from a
South African Mathematical Literacy class is analysed in terms of Kilpatrick,
Swafford and Findells (2001) five strands of mathematical proficiency. The
analysis points to evidence of the life skills-oriented Mathematical Literacy frame
opening up opportunities for engagement across aspects of all five strands, but
shows that the emphases differ from the intra-mathematical emphases within the
strands. I argue that this is due to the lack of centrality in the Mathematical
Literacy frame of the mathematical terrain. The shifting of competence to the
bridge between mathematics and everyday situations and problems retains
mathematical coherence and connectedness. Both of these aspects are grounded
in the mathematical tools and thinking that are needed to make sense of the
everyday situation, rather than the more intra-mathematical connections and
coherence that appear to be in focus within the strands of mathematical
proficiency.
Keywords: mathematical proficiency; Mathematical Literacy; South Africa

Introduction
Mathematical Literacy was introduced as a new subject in the post-compulsory
Further Education and Training (FET) phase in South Africa in 2006. The rhetoric
for this new subject is anchored in ideas relating to the quantitative skills needed for
adult life, including the need for active citizenship. As noted in the subjects
definition:
Mathematical Literacy provides pupils with an awareness and understanding of the role
that mathematics plays in the modern world. Mathematical Literacy is a subject driven
by life-related applications of mathematics. It enables pupils to develop the ability and
confidence to think numerically and spatially in order to interpret and critically analyse
everyday situations and to solve problems. (DoE 2003, 9)

Critiques of curricula in which features such as life-preparation or relevance have

been given centre-stage have argued that subjects taught in this way simply cannot
produce mathematical working in coherent ways, due to the fact that their content is
not organised around the structure of mathematics as a discipline, i.e. the way in
which mathematics curricula are traditionally organised (Davis 2003; Gardner 2008).
The question of the nature and coherence of the mathematical working produced
within Mathematical Literacy is the central issue addressed in this paper. The
*Email: hamsa.venkatakrishnan@wits.ac.za
ISSN 1479-4802 print/ISSN 1754-0178 online
# 2010 British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics
DOI: 10.1080/14794800903569865
http://www.informaworld.com

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

54

H. Venkat

aforementioned critiques have considered the notion of mathematical literacy1

theoretically. The implementation of Mathematical Literacy (ML) in South Africa
provides an opportunity to consider the nature and coherence of mathematical
working within the contours of a subject organised around life-oriented goals from
an empirical base
a series of four lessons from an extended litter project carried
out in one Grade 11 ML class. In this paper I use Kilpatrick, Swafford and Findells
(2001) strands of mathematical proficiency to consider the nature, breadth and
coherence of the mathematical working that the ML class engage with during the
project. This initial analysis is carried out in order to begin to consider empirically
both the mathematical possibilities and limitations that can be produced within a
life-oriented mathematical literacy frame.
In the following section, I introduce in further detail ML as presented in the
South African curriculum, including both the emphases and some of the contradictions inherent in the ways in which this curriculum has been specified. I then go
on to locate this South African version of ML within the broader international
mathematical literacy project, focusing specifically on key areas of overlap and
contrast. The strands of mathematical proficiency are introduced with reasons for
why this framework was used for the analysis of mathematical working within the
ML lessons. I then present the empirical data from the lessons. The analysis of these
data, using the descriptions of each of the five strands, follows. The paper concludes
with a discussion of the nature and breadth of mathematical working, and the
possibilities for mathematical working within subjects such as Mathematical
Literacy which operate with organising principles other than mathematics.
Mathematical Literacy in South Africa
The notion of needing to prepare for the quantitative demands of everyday adult life
is stressed in the ML curriculum statement, with its emphasis on developing the skills
needed for a range of adult life roles
becoming a self-managing person, a
productive worker and a contributing citizen are mentioned as the key roles in
focus (DoE 2003, 9
10). Teachers are advised that teaching ML involves the need to
engage with contexts (ibid, 42), with contextualisation exemplified with a range of
everyday life situations and problems. Critiques of the curriculum have identified
some tensions inherent in the curriculum statement and have noted that the
specification of the curriculum tends to pull back towards a more mathematical
frame (Christiansen 2007) in which mathematical development jostles with the need
for development of the life-related competences that dominate the rhetoric.
Further evidence of life preparation figuring as an organising principle within
ML can be seen in the lack of overt mathematical progression across the 3 grades
that comprise the FET phase (grades 10
12). This kind of progression typifies
traditional mathematical curricula and has been noted as a feature of the South
African FET Mathematics curriculum (Parker 2006). In some instances in the ML
Assessment Standards (AS), there is a re-statement of exactly the same AS across all
three Grades
e.g. 10.1.2
12.1.2 (16
17). The advice given in the post-amble to the
ASs acknowledges this situation explicitly, and argues that the reason for this is
related to the nature of ML:

Research in Mathematics Education

55

For Mathematical Literacy, the Assessment Standards do indicate progression from

grade to grade. However, this progression is not markedly evident in some of the
Assessment Standards. The complexity of the situation to be addressed in context,
through using the mathematical knowledge and ways of thought available to the learner,
is where the extent of the progression needs to be ensured. (2006, 38)

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

In the examples provided to indicate the nature of progression across the ASs, there
are instances where the emphasis is on increasing the complexity of the situation.
This kind of progression is used either instead of, or, in addition to, building a
mathematical hierarchy. Situational complexity alongside mathematical progression
is exemplified thus in AS 10.4.3 and 12.4.3 (34
35):
(10.4.3)
investigate the cost of a trolley of groceries at three different shops in the area
and report the findings by means of mean, median, mode and range.
(12.4.3)
compare the increase in the cost of a trolley of groceries to the increase in the
consumer price food index, and report the findings in terms of variance and standard
deviation of specific items.

When combined with the relatively widespread reference to problem-solving across a

broad range of real-world contexts in the ASs and the examples attached to them,
(e.g. The learner is able to use knowledge of numbers and their relationships to
investigate a range of different contexts which include financial aspects of personal,
business and national issues p14), there is evidence that, in spite of the apparent
mathematical structure, attempts have been made to incorporate a life preparation
orientation into the structuring of the curriculum.
In summary, therefore, a life-preparation orientation, in which contextualisation
in everyday-life situations is central, is a prevalent feature of the ML curriculum.
Some focus on mathematical development is also evident, but this sits alongside a
contextual development in which the everyday situations that learners are invited to
consider become more complex.
Conceptions of mathematical literacy in the international literature
Notions related to the idea of mathematical literacy are referred to in the literature in
a range of ways, numeracy and quantitative literacy being two of these (Coben 2003;
Steen 2001). Jablonka (2003, 81) notes that a range of interpretations of the idea also
exists. A central aspect of variation between these interpretations relates to
differences in the nature of the relationship between mathematics and the world.
She points out for example, that the problems selected for use in the PISA
international comparison mathematical literacy tests (OECD 2003) tend to foreground the notion that it is not the situations themselves that are of interest, but
only their mathematical descriptions.
Similarly, she notes that Kilpatricks (2001) conceptualisation of mathematical
literacy seems to translate largely into the notion of thinking mathematically, and
argues that the mathematical realm has primacy in this view of what it means to be
mathematically literate. This contrasts with Steens (2001) view that what he refers to
as quantitative literacy is often anchored in data derived from and attached to the
empirical world (2001, 5), and involves mathematics acting in the world (2001, 6).
A citizenship standpoint is echoed in the analysis of the notion of mathematical
literacy undertaken by Gellert, Jablonka and Keitel (2001) where they stress the need

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

56

H. Venkat

to focus on the social role (2001, 59) of mathematics, rather than be led by the
needs of mathematics as a discipline.
A similar split occurs within other groupings within the field of mathematics
education that view contextualisation as central. Researchers working with the
Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach argue that progressive mathematical thinking can be built within the need to mathematise experientially real
situations. Of interest in relation to ML in South Africa is that the selection and
sequencing of tasks operates on the basis of the openings they provide for
progressive mathematisation
with activities driven by the mathematical need to
work towards formalisation and generalisation (Gravemeijer 1994). In this sense, the
discipline of mathematics retains its place as an organising principle for RME-based
programmes.
In contrast to this mathematically-driven organisation, some aspects of the
modelling literature work with a more situational orientation. Modelling is premised
on the idea of linking mathematical working and thinking with real-world problems
(Niss, Blum, and Galbraith 2007). These authors acknowledge that modelling in
mathematics education is usually justified in one of two ways
as applications and
modelling for the learning of mathematics or learning mathematics so as to develop
competency in applying mathematics and building mathematical models (2007, 5,
original emphases). The latter orientation acknowledges to a greater extent the
importance of the extra-mathematical realm, with the competency sought located in
the bridge between mathematics and the world. This echoes the view proposed in the
ML policy documents that competence in the subject depends on combining
contextual understanding with mathematical content and skills (DoE 2006). ML in
South Africa shares the situational orientation found in some of the modelling
literature, with the situations selected in ML tending towards everyday life situations.
However, in contrast to the more extensive
and even central
emphasis on the
mathematical aspects in some of the approaches that stress the need for
contextualisation, the South African version differs in terms of its relatively limited
emphasis on mathematical development.
The literature within mathematics education that has taken the issue of
contextualisation as central has focused on critical and emancipatory approaches
(Skovsmose 1994; Vithal 2006). Whilst aspects of this literature are useful in
analysing the potential of the ML curriculum, critiques have noted that this
curriculum takes a much less radical line (Christiansen 2006).
The focus of this paper is on exploring what ML in South Africa, with its lifeoriented emphasis, might be able to deliver in terms of mathematical proficiency. In
line with many of the approaches focusing on contextualisation, the ML curriculum
and assessment frameworks stress notions of problem-solving in increasingly
unfamiliar/non-routine contexts. Thus, analysis of mathematical working in empirical data from classrooms taking the life-oriented/problem-solving approach
seriously is likely to require a mathematical frame that takes a broad view of what
is entailed in mathematical work. Kilpatrick et al.s (2001) framework, consisting of
five interconnected strands
drawn from a meta-analysis of prior research in
mathematics education, cognitive psychology and experiences of mathematics
teaching on what constitutes successful mathematical learning
provides this kind
of broad view. Their framework is introduced in the next section, with a justification
of my reasons for thinking it useful to use as an analytical frame.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Research in Mathematics Education

57

Kilpatrick et al.s strands of mathematical proficiency

Kilpatrick et al. have proposed that mathematical proficiency can be considered as
being comprised of five intertwined strands. These are: conceptual understanding;
procedural fluency; strategic competence; adaptive reasoning; and productive
disposition (see definitions and some elaboration on each in the data analysis
section). The authors argue that these strands, acting in concert, are the outputs of
adopting a composite, comprehensive view of successful mathematics learning
(2001, 116). Whilst the comprehensiveness of this view might be useful for the
purpose of evaluating the mathematical proficiency of the work carried out in ML
lessons, its emphatically mathematical frame may also cast ML in a deficit light,
especially given MLs emphasis on situational sense-making and contextual
orientation. In this work I see the strands as likely to be useful in rather partial,
mathematically-oriented ways. I acknowledge this as a limitation, but argue that an
exploratory analysis of empirical data from ML lessons using the strands can achieve
two inter-related aims: firstly, in instances where evidence of the different strands can
be interpreted as being present, the nature of their presence in a ML classroom can
then be considered; secondly, given the critics who have argued that coherent
mathematical working within a life-oriented ML frame is simply not possible, broad
evidence of the strands
should this be demonstrated
can be used towards further
consideration of the ways in which mathematical proficiency becomes more
achievable in ML. Given the largely theoretical orientation of much of the current
writing on mathematical literacy and the paucity of international examples of
implementation, and therefore, of empirical data, this working from an empirical
base provides both exemplification of what ML can look like in practice, and of what
can be achieved in ML lessons in mathematical terms.
In the following section, I present the data sources used in this paper.
Data sources
Mrs. Clucas (pseudonym) was the ML teacher who devised and ran the litter project
lessons that I focus on in this paper. During August 2007, I arranged to observe,
videotape and take field notes of her teaching a Grade 11 ML class with a colleague.
We chose to see Mrs. Clucas for two reasons. Firstly, she told us that she had been
able, over the course of Grade 10, to re-engage several of her disaffected pupils with
mathematical learning. Secondly, she noted that her class (18 pupils)
most of whom
had failed Mathematics at the end of Grade 9
had all passed ML in Grade 10, with
the majority achieving relatively high scores (marks over 60%).
Mrs. Clucas litter project was spread over six lessons over a period of four weeks,
and was interspersed with ongoing ML textbook-based class work. Her project was
titled Litter in our school, and she had devised an assignment booklet for the
project which was to form part of her Grade 11 ML pupils portfolios. The project
incorporated group and individual working. Over the course of the four project
lessons that were observed, we collated data from videotape and field notes, the
project booklet, and some samples of pupils completed work. We also interviewed
Mrs. Clucas using a semi-structured interview schedule, and transcribed this
interview verbatim. Within this interview, Mrs. Clucas spelt out her views on what
the purpose of studying Mathematical Literacy was:

58

H. Venkat

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

The first time I encountered this water consumption thing . . . and you know there are a
whole lot of other things: blood alcohol levels, that is where theyre at, teenage
pregnancies, I think, that theres so much you can talk about. And I just think . . . Its so
important to their lives. Its not just the number work. Thats what I think.

This comment and others that I had heard from her in prior interactions (in seminars
and workshops she had attended, and an earlier focus group interview) confirmed
that for her, mathematics as a discipline was not viewed as the sole organising
principle within her selection of activities to do with her Mathematical Literacy
class
the need for tasks that would be relevant to the life situations of her pupils
and their future needs had to figure in the lessons, alongside the mathematical work.
In the next section, I provide some detail on the booklet devised by Mrs. Clucas
for this project. I then go on to provide excerpts from field note and video data that
focus on delineating the mathematical work that Mrs. Clucas and her pupils engaged
with during the course of the project. The excerpts used in the descriptive section that
follows are labelled with letters to facilitate reference back to them in the analysis.
Mrs. Clucas litter project
The opening section of Mrs. Clucas project booklet asked pupils, in groups, to
consider litter around the school, where litter went, how it got there, whether any
recycling occurred, and who to ask and how they might find out answers to these
questions if they were not sure. The booklet went on to ask pupils to devise a data
collection sheet for recording data for a corridor in the school that was assigned to
their group, conduct an interview with the person/ people who would have relevant
information and follow-up with them on data collection, to collate this data, do
appropriate calculations needed to represent their findings, and then to compare and
contrast the findings for each corridor in order to build up a combined picture of the
litter situation across the school.
In the first lesson, I noted the highly unstructured nature of the group discussions
occurring in the classroom, with Mrs. Clucas intervening after 15 minutes to ask the
class who they thought they should go to in order to find out about the schools litter
situation. A lengthy classroom debate ensued, with eventual consensus that the
cleaners should be approached. At this point, the need to interview them was
suggested, with this requiring the design of appropriate questions. Different groups
came up with different questions to ask, and plans for how the cleaners might be able
to help them with data collection. At this point, Mrs. Clucas suggested that, as they
wanted to combine data across groups later on, it would be useful to discuss and
agree on categories of litter to focus on. Another extended whole class discussion
occurred, described in my field notes thus:
A
Mrs. C comes to the board. Ok, so what types of litter?
Plastic is suggested.
Mrs. C asks So what counts as plastic?
The class comes up with suggestions
bottles, chip packets, sandwich plastic, sweet
packets.
Wasted food is offered as the next category, and then broken down into whole and
half-eaten.
A learner (hesitantly) asks a question about where things like banana peel/ apple cores/
orange peel should go. She almost stops herself from asking saying it is a silly question.

Research in Mathematics Education

59

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Mrs. C encourages her to ask and, after hearing her, she notes that there was nothing
silly about what she has asked.
A boy responds that this is organic waste, it is biodegradable. Mrs. C writes up
biodegradable on the board with three lines radiating outwards pointing to the words
banana peel, apple cores and orange peel.
The next types of litter mentioned by pupils are tin foil and cans. Mrs. C asks how these
should be classified. Metal is offered as a way of covering both of these. Paper is then
offered as the next category.

Four categories are eventually agreed on: metal, plastic, waste food and paper.
The ethics of the situation
asking cleaners to help them with data collection
are
discussed and this leads into an agreement that a data collection sheet should
be designed by each group to save the cleaners time. The number of pieces of each
type of litter collected needs to be recorded on this data sheet. In their groups, pupils
bring up questions about how to classify half-bits of paper, and whether to set up
their data collection tables in tally or grouped numerical format (e.g. 1
10, 11
20,
etc). Mrs. Clucas rarely offers tidy resolutions to their questions, often responding
with Well, what do you think is best? and Why? The resulting situation is that
different groups are working with tables involving different modes of recording.
Commentary in field notes at this stage appears thus:
B
Plastic, waste (food), metal and paper are agreed on. Mrs. C asks whether they should
stop there, and if so, why. In whole-class discussion, the following points are raised:

small number of categories make data easy to graph

but results might be less accurate because of this
Mrs. C asks the class what the intention is when collecting data and doing a project on
litter
to enable better recycling is suggested as a response. Mrs. C notes that the school
already has special bins for plastic and metal so the fact that these categories have been
selected is helpful in relation to that aim.

In the next lesson, cleaners for the assigned corridors are invited in to be interviewed
by groups of pupils. Following this lesson, each group is asked to devise a tidy
version of their data collection table with spaces in which the cleaners can quickly
and easily record the daily frequencies of each type of litter, to take responsibility for
getting the data sheet to the cleaner, and to arrange to collect it back from them a
week later. Several problems arise within this process, which, again are opened up for
discussion. Three excerpts (C, D and E) from my field notes are used to present some
of the interactions that follow in Mrs. Clucas classroom:
C
The pair of girls working in the middle of the room self-correct through argument and
discussion their way of calculating the appropriate angle on a pie chart to represent each
category of litter. Within their discussion, one girl refers back to work in her exercise
book on pie charts. She uses this to check the working that her partner has done to get
the answer. This is the end point of a discussion that began with the view that percentage
represented by each category is needed, and that this requires multiplying each data
value by 10.
D
The girl working on her own has borrowed and adjusted data collected by another
group as she has a data sheet where cleaners were advised to put in ticks rather than

60

H. Venkat
quantities. During the lesson, Mrs. C asks for data sheets to be passed around. On
looking at what this girl is doing, Mrs. C asks her whether she thinks adjusting data like
this is okay. Girl begins with the view that it is, but on further probing admits that it
does make the data collection inaccurate in terms of finding out about school litter
situation.
E
Another group has made the decision to use the middle values where their categories
have a tick in the relevant band interval instead of a number. Thus, they use 15 to
represent the number of pieces of paper if a tick has been put against paper in the 11
20
pieces of litter column.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

In the following lesson, groups have completed the calculations needed to produce
pie charts from their data, and are asked to put their completed pie charts up on the
wall for other pupils to look at and start comparing and combining their findings.
Once again here, I use field note excerpts (F, G, H and I) to present key interactions:
F
One group has put up a chart with six segments rather than the four categories that were
agreed on by the class earlier. The girls in the group argue that this is not a problem, that
their chart, because it has more detail, is actually more accurate. Within this debate,
Mrs. C calls them back to what the problem on the worksheet asked them to do
(collation and comparison of data across the groups), whilst one of the girls argues that
their chart contains all the necessary info needed to pick up marks for project
heading,
key, colours, percentages, etc. Mrs. C opens this debate to the class, noting again that the
worksheet asks for comparisons to be made using the pie charts produced by different
groups. Different ways of working through are brought up in this discussion
can the
categories selected by the two girls be collapsed into other categories. E.g., the girls do
have paper and plastic segments. On one of their categories
bottles, pupils say that it
is possible to put into plastic category, but sweet wrappers and crisp packets are
harder to fit in as some say sweet wrappers should be waste and others argue that it is
plastic. Mrs. C does not intervene here. Girls stick to their view that there is still not a
problem. Mrs. C continues to press
can the other groups adapt their pie charts to fit
categories used by the two girls and are they prepared to do this? Some groups say No,
and others point out that they do not have data broken down in this way in any case.
A boy notes that the class did agree earlier on the four categories.
Pupils are asked to work with the pie charts defined by different cleaners sections as
indicated on the coloured school map of classrooms, and identify predominant
categories. They are also asked to deal with the interpretation issues that arise when
dealing with the 6-category pie chart. The class eventually agree that the 6-category data
has to be discounted in the overall comparison. Mrs. C leaves the column for their
corridor blank on the board and scribbles a line down it to show it is being omitted.
G
In commenting on comparisons across the different groups pie charts, a girl has written
in her booklet that There was a lot of paper.
Mrs. C: Well for me, if my bin is full of paper that might be a lot, but for Mrs. Wright,
about that much [indicates lower with her hands] might be a lot. So what is a lot?
The girl shifts to a more explicitly quantified statement.
Mrs. C: Well that is better.
H
Mrs. C asks the class how best to represent the combined data to facilitate comparison.
In discussion, a boy suggests that a compound bar chart can be used, and that he has
seen these used in geography to compare rainfall. A question then arises as to whether
the grouping of bars should be based on the corridor covered by each group or by litter
type. Mrs. C quickly sketches both versions on the board thus (Figure 1
by corridor
and Figure 2
by litter type):

Research in Mathematics Education

Corridor 1

Figure 1.

Corridor 2

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

etc

by corridor

Plastic

Figure 2.

61

Metal

etc

by litter type

A boy at the front suggests that the second version is better to compare amounts of each
type of litter.
I
One groups data sheet has been left at home. Two girls say they want to wait for the
missing groups data before they start drawing a graph
they say that these missing
numbers could affect the scale that they choose.

Across the mathematical outputs seen by this stage (data tables, calculations leading
to pie charts and combined bar charts), it is worth noting that across the different
groups, work was largely accurate and complete. Additionally, justification of
selected procedures and representations appeared to be a routine part of their
classroom working. This, in particular, is noteworthy, given that the ML group was
comprised predominantly of learners who had failed mathematics at the end of
Grade 9. In the interview with Mrs. Clucas conducted in the course of the litter
project, she acknowledged that she refrained from mathematical closure and tidiness
within her interactions with the class deliberately and as dictated by her perceived
priority in ML lessons of a focus on practical proficiencies needed for adult life:
You see, I dont give them much help. I wait until they reach breaking limits and
then Ill say okay think about this. You know, in your life you have to sort your
own problems out.
I shift now into the analysis of these data in relation to Kilpatrick et al.s five
strands of mathematical proficiency.
Analysis
I noted in the last section Mrs. Clucas emphasis on developing the skills needed for
life within ML. Across the excerpts presented above there was a strong emphasis
within her teaching on encouraging her pupils to make sense of the problem
situation as it stood at various stages of their working. Within Mrs. Clucas more
life-oriented frame, the need for sense-making and problem-solving appeared to be
viewed as important aspects of the thinking and reasoning needed to function in life
as well as to understand elements of the litter project in the lessons. The need for
mathematical processes was built into the task design as pupils were expected to

62

H. Venkat

categorise, collate, compare, represent and analyse information. However, the focus
of pupils attention and the ways in which they were asked to justify their claims was
insistently driven by the need to understand the litter situation
and not by the need
to advance their mathematical thinking. In spite of this differentiation between the
in-built mathematical elements of the task and the prioritising of the focus on
contextual elements during the lessons, significant openings for mathematical
activity can still be discerned within Mrs. Clucas organisation and interactions
across the project. In the analysis that follows, I examine aspects of the excerpts
presented in the last section in relation to Kilpatrick et al.s five strands of
mathematical proficiency in order to highlight and discuss these openings.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Conceptual understanding
Kilpatrick et al. describe conceptual understanding as an integrated and functional
grasp of mathematical ideas (2001, 118). Competency in this strand is defined in
terms of being able to represent mathematical situations in different ways and
knowing how different representations can be useful for different purposes (2001,
119). Excerpt H in the last section
involving a discussion about how best to
facilitate comparison between results for different corridors, that concluded with a
decision to use compound bar charts and a further selection and rationale for the
format of this chart
provides one exemplar of pupils having opportunities for
conceptual understanding opened up for them through Mrs. Clucas question asking
for a suitable representation. Pupils justifications suggested that they understood, in
particular, the need for functionality in their mathematical choices. Further, the
comment that this kind of representation had been seen performing a similar
function in Geography suggests the kind of flexible understanding (Boaler 1999) of
the function of compound bar charts that is viewed as a key feature of strategic
competence, as well as a loosening of the boundaries of sources and applications of
mathematical knowledge
a feature that has been noted as not easily achievable in
several studies of mathematical learning (Saxe 1991).
Procedural fluency
Kilpatrick et al. describe procedural fluency as knowledge of procedures, knowledge
of when and how to use them appropriately, and skill in performing them flexibly,
accurately and efficiently (2001, 121). In the text just preceding and within Excerpt
G I noted that all groups had produced pie charts that accurately represented their
data and showed the calculations completed to draw them. The need for the accuracy
that quantification can provide is also motivated through the comment made by Mrs.
Clucas in Excerpt G noting the ambiguity in the pupils statement about the meaning
of a lot. Further, the argumentation and self-correcting that is described in Excerpt
C and the girls who argue in Excerpt I that they should wait for missing values from
one group in order to be able to decide upon a suitable scale for their compound bar
chart suggest a procedural fluency that is underpinned by conceptual understanding.
At the same time, however, Excerpt C indicates that the procedure of changing data
values in a table to a percentage has not been mastered, in spite of the fact that the
girls involved clearly exhibited both the disposition to refer back to earlier work
covering this procedure independently and the strategic competence needed to adapt

Research in Mathematics Education

63

and apply this procedure accurately to their data. Once again, there is evidence of the
development of flexible knowledge and a willingness to persevere independently.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Strategic competence
Kilpatrick et al. describe strategic competence as the ability to formulate mathematical problems, represent them and solve them (2001, 124). They point out the links
between this strand and problem solving and problem formulation. The openness
of Mrs. Clucas organisation of the litter project leaves negotiable several aspects of
the problem formulation and its solving, with pupils given openings to discuss and
reach consensus on the categories to focus on, who to ask, and how to collect and
record information (see introduction to the project and Excerpt A). Wenger (1998)
has noted that such negotiability provides important opportunities in relation to
developing an identity that is consonant with the goals and competences valued
within specific communities (see Graven 2008 for a discussion of this issue in relation
to Mathematical Literacy in South Africa). The extensive discussions that occur
around these problems open spaces for pupils to offer and consider a range of
factors/options for ways forward. Conversations that engage with issues such as the
advantages and disadvantages of increasing the level of detail (Excerpt B) point to
the fact that Mrs. Clucas provides openings for her class to engage in the process of
devising models that might help them to understand the litter situation. Similarly,
the fact that a learner appears able to devise a strategy involving middle values as a
way of estimating litter totals from grouped data (Excerpt E) suggests the ability to
devise novel solution methods when needed (Kilpatrick et al. 2001, 126)
a feature
of the strategic competence strand. Of interest here is that the need to deal with the
data from the problem has created a strong motivation for the emergence of a
problem-solving strategy
a point that has been emphasised in many previous texts
stressing the need for the centrality of sense-making within mathematical learning
(Mukhopadhyay and Greer 2001). Of interest also though, is that this motivation is
not used within these lessons as a vehicle for teaching a conventional method for
calculating mid-interval values; also that no mathematical discussion occurs about
the impact of discrete/continuous data, and no link is made between the estimated
frequencies that are worked out here and the extension of this thinking in working
out estimated mean values for interval-based data. Essentially, there is no jump into
a more purely mathematically-oriented discussion
into looking at either
mathematical connections or mathematical structure
as there might be within
the vertical mathematization part of the RME-approach lessons (Gravemeijer 1994)
or in the mathematical model focused working in the modelling literature (Niss,
Blum, and Galbraith 2007).
Adaptive reasoning
Kilpatrick et al. describe adaptive reasoning as the capacity to think logically about
the relationships among concepts and situations (2001, 129). The ability to consider
and select from alternatives is viewed as a key aspect of adaptive reasoning
and this
was a feature that underpinned many of the discussions in Mrs. Clucas classroom.
Within this strand, however, some elements of the differentiation between the
securely mathematical frame that underlie Kilpatrick et al.s strands and the more

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

64

H. Venkat

life-oriented frames of Mathematical Literacy become evident. Kilpatrick et al.

emphasise that logical thinking goes beyond purely deductive reasoning into more
inductive and even informal reasoning. Whilst informal arguments and justifications
were seen in several of the excerpts above, it is interesting to note both the overt
conditionality of some of these justifications (e.g. if you select more categories, then
your pie chart becomes more complex) and the grey areas that are acknowledged
within these statements where there is not a straightforward, mathematically-correct,
right answer, but appropriate, better and worse formulations based on the nature of
the problem are still being considered. Mathematical working, therefore, remains
primarily anchored (as Steen 2001 has suggested), in the needs of the situation.
In addition, the alternatives at play in this classroom go beyond merely
mathematical considerations. The girl who has adapted another groups data is
offered a choice about whether to re-collect information (Excerpt D), and the group
with six categories retain the choice to stick with them (Excerpt F). However, in this
process, issues about authenticity (discussed previously in the South African context
by Sethole 2004) and the importance of the litter issue that is under scrutiny, the need
to be able to trust data within a research process, and the independence to make
choices
and to deal with the consequences of these choices as part of life
preparation
are also incorporated. Across both the mathematical and life-oriented
decision-making that occurs, devolution of responsibility for decision-making to
pupils and an emphasis on facing up to the consequences of decisions taken are
common features
features that have been noted as frequently absent in traditional
mathematics classrooms where pupils responsibility is restricted to imitation of
actions (Boaler 1997). Admittedly this devolution of choice creates ruptures and
delays in the flow of the mathematical working. However, through the teachers
insistence on following up the ruptures, mathematical considerations of effective
problem-posing, the conditions that allow for comparison and the need for both
effective and efficient data recording models are opened up.
Productive disposition
Kilpatrick et al. describe productive disposition as the tendency to see sense in
mathematics, to perceive it as both useful and worthwhile, to believe that steady
effort in learning mathematics pays off, and to see oneself as an effective learner and
doer of mathematics (2001, 131). Furthermore, Kilpatrick et al. suggest that
developing a productive disposition requires frequent opportunities to make sense
of mathematics (ibid).
Across the course of the litter project, and in the analysis of the strands above, I
have noted already that the pupils in this class appeared willing to engage in extended
discussions related to trying to understand and make sense of the litter situation in
their school. Such perseverance has been documented as being relatively rare in
mathematics classrooms (Schoenfeld 1985), but it is important to note further here
that the pupils in Mrs. Clucas Mathematical Literacy classroom were those who had
failed, or struggled extensively in their previous experiences in mathematics
classrooms. Negative experiences of prior mathematical working and lack of success
therefore characterized their mathematical histories (Venkat and Graven 2008).
Openings appear to have been provided for them in this project that motivate the
need for mathematical working and make it possible to make sense of this working.

Research in Mathematics Education

65

Pupils work on percentages, grouped bar charts that aid comparison of data, and
middle values that facilitate estimation of total amounts of litter provide examples
of this.
I move on now to discuss the issues raised within this analysis. In particular
I focus on the potential and limitations of the mathematical activity that has
emerged within the Mathematical Literacy litter project lessons in relation to
evidence of Kilpatrick et al.s five strands of mathematical proficiency.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

Discussion
The analysis above points to a fairly broad-ranging coverage across the five strands
of mathematical proficiency during the litter project lessons. Coherence appears to
have been maintained within Mrs. Clucas recurring insistence that mathematical
work is guided by the need to make sense of the situation. Thus, the middle values
suggested are accepted on the basis that they are sensible in relation to the situation
and not necessarily on the basis of mathematical convention, and decisions about
how to group the bars for the compound bar chart are grounded in the same way. As
the analysis above has started to point out, mathematical decision-making and
justification driven by the situational needs of the ML frame produce subtle
differences in the slants within the strands. These differences are explored in this
concluding discussion.
A central feature of these differences relates to Kilpatrick et al.s recurring
reference to developing an appreciation of mathematical structure and mathematical
connections, and building progression into more advanced aspects of mathematics as
a discipline. Thus, a key indicator of conceptual understanding is described in the
following terms: To find ones way around the mathematical terrain, it is important
to see how the various representations connect with each other, how they are similar
and how they are different (2001, 119).
In contrast, as noted earlier, neither the ML curriculum nor the enactment of it
depicted in the excerpts above are organised around the needs of the mathematical
terrain
the focus, instead, in an ML lesson is on the terrain of the situations being
investigated, and it is this terrain that grounds discussions. Thus, within the litter
project, the needs of the litter situation largely drove the representations that
were selected for looking at and comparing the data. Connections similarly function
in the space between the situation and the mathematics required to understand
it rather than intra-mathematically. A by-product of this situational grounding is
the visibility of aspects such as the link between categorisation and comparison

the kind of link that is largely invisible in more traditional mathematical work in the
classroom, where the press towards the production of mathematical objects
that facilitate comparison (e.g. pie charts) takes precedence over discussions about
the requirements for agreed categories that facilitate this comparison in the first
place. Such connections were highly visible within the litter project class work.
This differentiated emphasis on the mathematical and situational terrains can be
seen in the evidence from across the five strands. Under strategic competence, for
example, Kilpatrick et al. stress the need to develop the ability to see the common
mathematical structures underlying multiple representations. Whilst the borrowing
of compound bar charts from a geography context into the litter situation context by
a learner suggests that some structural similarity was seen, this similarity does not

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

66

H. Venkat

become the focus of discussion. Within the productive disposition strand, too,
Kilpatrick et al. suggest the importance of opportunities to make sense of
mathematics. Once again, the ML pupils in this class are not centrally engaged
with making sense of the mathematics per se in their activity; but, primarily, with
making sense of the litter project situation.
The evidence of grounding mathematical activity in the litter situation in this
paper by Mrs. Clucas and her pupils raises questions about the role, if any, of
abstraction and generalisation, both of central significance within mathematics, in
ML lessons. The data in this study suggest a localisation of the mathematical work
done within the confines of the immediate problem. This localisation appears to have
facilitated a quite creative first principles sort of approach
the invention of
middle values to deal with the problem of grouped data without quantification
in sensible, and good enough ways, rather than in formal mathematical ways.
Mrs. Clucas insistence on justification and explanation also emphasises the adaptive
reasoning skills that many in this class appear willing to adopt. Whilst this
localisation or anchoring does not appear to have closed doors to generalisation
and abstraction, there is little evidence in the episodes presented of moves into more
formal mathematical terrain. The goal of understanding the litter situation simply
did not appear to require these aspects of mathematical work.
Overall, in spite of this shift in centre away from mathematics per se to the spaces
interlinking mathematical thinking with the needs of a problem situation,
opportunities for sense-making and flexible problem-solving were clearly opened
up. Coherence was maintained within this work through its grounding in the needs of
the situation. Evidence of Kilpatrick et al.s five strands of mathematical proficiency
also emerged, and this proficiency shared some
and sometimes limited
overlaps
with mathematical proficiency as defined by these authors. Thus, whilst pupils were
able to make use of structural similarity in compound bar charts, this is not
necessarily an indication of conceptual fluency in Kilpatrick et al.s terms. Indeed,
anecdotal evidence from Mathematical Literacy teachers suggests that their pupils
still freeze when faced with more traditional abstract mathematics.
The discussion presented in this paper suggests that Kilpatrick et al.s five strands
of mathematical proficiency can be useful for understanding the mathematical
potential of subjects, like Mathematical Literacy, which involve life preparation and
citizenship orientations. This lens shows that much useful mathematics can be
produced, and importantly, that some of the strands that Kilpatrick et al. describe as
under-represented in many mainstream mathematics classrooms (in particular,
strategic competence, adaptive reasoning and the development of a productive
disposition) feature strongly in ML lessons. At the same time, however, it is worth
acknowledging that opportunities for mathematical abstraction and generalisation
were not taken up across the observed lessons.
Furthermore, discussing evidence from ML lessons in the light of Kilpatrick
et al.s five strands of mathematical proficiency offers an opportunity to consider
how these five strands can perhaps be reconceptualised when the centrality of
the mathematical terrain in these strands is tempered with the consideration of the
terrain of mathematical literacy with life-oriented goals. Further work remains to be
done in order to understand the potential of this reconceptualisation.

Research in Mathematics Education

67

Note
1. The capitalised Mathematical Literacy is used throughout this paper to refer specifically
to the subject as defined/enacted in the context of the South African FET curriculum. The
small mathematical literacy is used to refer to the more general project
interpreted in a
range of ways
that is referred to as desirable across a range of international mathematics
education literature. Overlaps and contrasts between the two are considered later in the
paper.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

References
Boaler, J. 1997. Experiencing school mathematics: Teaching styles, sex and setting. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Boaler, J. 1999. Creating flexible knowledge in the mathematics classroom. Pythagoras 48:
10
16.
Christiansen, I.M. 2006. Mathematical literacy as a school subject: Failing the progressive
vision? Pythagoras 64: 6
13.
Christiansen, I.M. 2007. Mathematical literacy as a school subject: Mathematical gaze or
livelihood gaze? African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology
Education 11, no.1: 91
105.
Coben, D., D. Colwell, S. Macrae, J. Boaler, M. Brown, and V. Rhodes. 2003. Adult numeracy:
Review of research and related literature. London: National Research and Development
Centre for adult numeracy and literacy.
Davis, Z. 2003. Free Associations
From Hardy to Duchamp to the place of mathematics.
Pythagoras 57: 2
5.
DoE. 2003. National curriculum statement grades 10
12 (general): Mathematical literacy.
Pretoria, SA: Department of Education.
DoE. 2006. National curriculum statement grades 10
12, teacher guide, mathematical literacy.
Pretoria, SA: Department of Education.
Gardner, A. 2008. What is mathematical literacy? Paper presented at the 11th International
Congress on Mathematical Education, in Monterrey, Mexico.
Gellert, U., E. Jablonka, and C. Keitel. 2001. Mathematical literacy and common sense in
mathematics education. In Sociocultural research on mathematics education: An international
perspective, ed. B. Atweh, H. Forgasz, and B. Nebres. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Gravemeijer, K. 1994. Developing realistic mathematics education. Utrecht, The Netherlands:
The Freudenthal Institute.
Graven, M. 2008. Mathematical literacy in South Africa
an opportunity for shifting learner
identities in relation to mathematics. Paper presented at the 11th International Congress on
Mathematical Education, in Monterrey, Mexico.
Jablonka, E. 2003. Mathematical literacy. In Second international handbook of mathematics
education, ed. A.J. Bishop, M.A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, and F.K.S. Leung, 75

102. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kilpatrick, J. 2001. Understanding mathematical literacy: The contribution of research.
Educational Studies in Mathematics 47, no. 1: 101
16.
Kilpatrick, J., J. Swafford, and B. Findell. 2001. Adding it up: Helping children learn
mathematics. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
Mukhopadhyay, S., and B. Greer. 2001. Modeling with purpose: Mathematics as a critical
tool. In Sociocultural research on mathematics education: An international perspective, ed.
B. Atweh, H. Forgasz, and B. Nebres, 295
311. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Niss, M., W. Blum, and P. Galbraith. 2007. Introduction. In Modelling and applications in
mathematics education, ed. W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H.-W. Henn, and M. Niss, 3
32. New
York: Springer.
OECD. 2003. The PISA 2003 assessment framework
mathematics, reading, science and
problem-solving knowledge and skills. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development.

Downloaded by [], [Solun Say] at 10:51 14 October 2015

68

H. Venkat

Parker, D. 2006. Grade 10
12 mathematics curriculum reform in South Africa: A textual
analysis of new national curriculum statements. African Journal of Research in Mathematics. Science and Technology Education 10, no. 2: 59
73.
Saxe, G.B. 1991. Culture and cognitive development: Studies in mathematical understanding.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schoenfeld, A.H. 1985. Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic Press.
Sethole, G. 2004. Meaningful contexts or dead mock reality: Which form will the everyday
take? Pythagoras 59: 18
25.
Skovsmose, O. 1994. Toward a critical philosophy of mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic publishers.
Steen, L.A. 2001. The case for quantitative literacy. In Mathematics and democracy, ed.
L.A. Steen, 1
22. Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
Venkat, H., and M. Graven. 2008. Opening up spaces for learning: Learners perceptions of
mathematical literacy in grade 10. Education as Change 12, no. 1: 29
44.
Vithal, R. 2006. Developing mathematical literacy through project work: A teacher/teaching
perspective. Pythagoras 64: 37
44.
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.