Bridging the macro- and micro-divide: using an activity theory model to capture sociocultural complexity in mathematics teaching and its development

  • Barbara Jaworski
  • Despina Potari


This paper is methodologically based, addressing the study of mathematics teaching by linking micro- and macro-perspectives. Considering teaching as activity, it uses Activity Theory and, in particular, the Expanded Mediational Triangle (EMT) to consider the role of the broader social frame in which classroom teaching is situated. Theoretical and methodological approaches are illustrated through episodes from a study of the mathematics teaching and learning in a Year-10 class in a UK secondary school where students were considered as “lower achievers” in their year group. We show how a number of questions about mathematics teaching and learning emerging from microanalysis were investigated by the use of the EMT. This framework provided a way to address complexity in the activity of teaching and its development based on recognition of central social factors in mathematics teaching–learning.


Mathematics teaching Teaching as activity Activity theory Expanded meditational triangle Macroanalysis Microanalysis Teaching triad 


  1. Abboud-Blanchard, M., Cazes, C., & Vandebrouck, F. (2007). Teachers’ activity in exercises-based lessons: Some case studies. In D. Pitta- Pantazi, & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1827–1836). Cyprus: University of Cyprus.Google Scholar
  2. Bartolini Bussi, M. G. (1998). Verbal interaction in the mathematics classroom: A Vygotskian analysis. In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp. 65–84). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  3. Boaler, J., & Wiliam, D. (2001). ‘We’ve still got to learn!’ Student’s perspectives on ability grouping and mathematical achievement. In P. Gates (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching (pp. 77–92). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Chazan, D. (2000). Beyond formulas in mathematics and teaching: Dynamics of the high school algebra classroom. New York: Teacher’s College Press.Google Scholar
  5. Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, B. Howson, & M. Otte (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematics education (pp. 243–307). Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  6. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., & Wood, T. (1992). Interaction and learning in mathematics classroom situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23, 99–122. doi: 10.1007/BF00302315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognition: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  9. Engeström, Y. (1998). Reorganising the motivational sphere of classroom culture: An activity-theoretical analysis of planning in a teacher team. In F. Seeger, J. Voigt, & U. Waschescio (Eds.), The Culture of the Mathematics Classroom (pp. 76–103). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Engeström, Y., & Cole, M. (1997). Situated cognition in search of an agenda. In J. A. Whitson, & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Situated cognition. Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives (pp. 301–309). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Jaworski, B. (1994). Investigating mathematics teaching: A constructivist enquiry. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  12. Jaworski, B. (1998). Mathematics teacher research: Process, practice and the development of teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1, 3–31. doi: 10.1023/A:1009903013682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jaworski, B., & Goodchild, S. (2006). Inquiry community in an activity theory frame. In J. Navotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 353–360). Prague: Charles University.Google Scholar
  14. Kieran, C., Forman, E., & Sfard, A. (2001). Bridging the individual and the social: Discursive approaches to research in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46, 1–3. doi: 10.1023/A:1014276102421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leont’ev, A. N. (1979). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in soviet psychology (pp. 37–71). New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  16. Lerman, S. (1996). Intersubjectivity in mathematics learning: A challenge to the radical constructivist paradigm. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 133–150. doi: 10.2307/749597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lerman, S. (2001). Cultural, discursive psychology: A sociocultural approach to studying the teaching and learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46, 87–113. doi: 10.1023/A:1014031004832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lerman, S., Xu, G., & Tsatsaroni, A. (2002). Developing theories of mathematics education research: The ESM story. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51, 23–40. doi: 10.1023/A:1022412318413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mellin Olsen, S. (1987). The politics of mathematics education. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  20. Potari, D., & Jaworski, B. (2002). Tacking complexity in mathematics teaching development: Using the teaching triad as a tool for reflection and analysis. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 351–380. doi: 10.1023/A:1021214604230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Seeger, F., Voigt, J., & Waschescio, U. (1998). The culture of the mathematics classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Steinbring, H. (1998). Elements of epistemological knowledge for mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1, 157–189. doi: 10.1023/A:1009984621792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Valero-Dueñas, P. X. (2002). Reform, democracy and mathematics education: Towards a socio-political frame for understanding change in the organisation of secondary school mathematics. Unpublished PhD thesis. The Danish University of Education, Denmark.Google Scholar
  24. Van Oers, B. (2001). Educational forms of initiation in mathematical culture. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46, 59–85. doi: 10.1023/A:1014031507535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Voigt, J. (1996). Negotiation of mathematical meaning in classroom processes: Social interaction and learning mathematics. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 21–50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Wertsch, J. V., & Lee, B. (1984). The multiple levels of analysis in a theory of action. Human Development, 27, 193–196.Google Scholar
  27. Wertsch, J. V., del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.),Sociocultural studies of the mind (pp. 1–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mathematics Education CentreLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK
  2. 2.University of AthensAthensGreece

Personalised recommendations