Abstract
In this chapter we juxtapose two analyses of episodes from a year 9 mathematics class. Particularly, we analyse the ways that a mathematics teacher managed authority relationships when he moved from a familiar context to an unfamiliar one in a much larger school. We build off an analysis using authority structures, following previous research. Then we compare that to an analysis based on politeness theory, with a focus on the effect of verbal acts on the participants’ faces. Additionally, we investigate how various verbal acts affect the definition of the situation. We conclude by comparing the revelations from the two conceptual frames; we claim that politeness theory may help us explain teachers’ and students’ choices of particular authority structures in their classroom interactions.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Biddle, B. J., & Thomas, E. J. (1966). Prescriptions. In B. J. Biddle & E. J. Thomas (Eds.), Role theory: Concepts and research (pp. 103–104). New York: Wiley.
Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Prediger, S. (Eds.). (2014). Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education. Dordrecht: Springer.
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1999). Positioning and personhood. In R. Harré & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 32–52). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Goffman, E. (1971). The presentation of self in everyday life. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin University Books.
Goffman, E. (1972). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin University Books.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press.
Harré, R., & van Langenhove, L. (Eds.). (1999). Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Wagner, D. (2010). Appraising lexical bundles in mathematics classroom discourse: Obligation and choice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75, 43–63.
Herbel-Eisenmann, B., Wagner, D., Johnson, K., Suh, H., & Figueras, H. (2015). Positioning in mathematics education: Revelations on an imported theory. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(2), 185–204.
Homans, G. C. (1966). Norms and Behavior. In B. J. Biddle & E. J. Thomas (Eds.), Role theory: Concepts and research (pp. 134–144). New York: Wiley.
Kádár, D., & Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding politeness. London: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 458–508.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Rowland, T. (1999). Pronouns in mathematical talk: Power, vagueness, and generalization. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19, 19–26.
Rowland, T. (2000). The pragmatics of mathematics education: Vagueness in mathematical discourse. London: Falmer Press.
Tatsis, K., & Dekker, R. (2010). Combining approaches for the analysis of collaborative mathematics learning. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30, 18–21.
Tatsis, K., & Koleza, E. (2008). Social and sociomathematical norms in collaborative problem solving. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31, 89–100.
Tatsis, K., & Maj-Tatsis, B. (2017). Authority structures in preservice teachers’ talk. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth congress of the European society for research in mathematics education (CERME10, February 1–5, 2017) (pp. 1380–1387). Dublin, Ireland: DCU Institute of Education and ERME.
Tatsis, K., & Rowland, T. (2006). Vague language in Greek and English mathematical talk: A variation study in face-work. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 5, pp. 257–264). Prague: Charles University.
van Langenhove, L., & Harré, R. (1999). Introducing positioning theory. In R. Harré & L. van Lagenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 14–31). Oxford: Blackwell.
Wagner, D., & Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2009). Re-mythologizing mathematics through attention to classroom positioning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(1), 1–15.
Wagner, D., & Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2014). Identifying authority structures in mathematics classroom discourse: A case of a teacher’s early experience in a new context. ZDM: The International Journal of Mathematics Education, 46, 871–882.
Yackel, E. (2001). Explanation, justification and argumentation in mathematics classrooms. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th annual conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 1, pp. 9–24). The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Utrecht University.
Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 390–408.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tatsis, K., Wagner, D. (2018). Authority and Politeness: Complementary Analyses of Mathematics Teaching Episodes. In: Moschkovich, J., Wagner, D., Bose, A., Rodrigues Mendes, J., SchĂĽtte, M. (eds) Language and Communication in Mathematics Education. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75055-2_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75055-2_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75054-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75055-2
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)