Advertisement

How the “Machinery” of Sense Production Changes Over Time

  • Timothy Koschmann
  • Robert Sigley
  • Alan Zemel
  • Carolyn Maher
Chapter

Abstract

In the current chapter, we seek to document how differences in practice across different occasions can in some cases evidence change in the underlying “machinery” of sense production and, in this way, demonstrate a change in member competence. We track two students, Dana and Stephanie, as they work through a mathematical story problem, first in the second grade and then again in the third. We argue that changes over time to the “machinery” of sense production constitute changes in what counts as competence and studying such changes represents a valid approach to producing a “developmental sociology”. And, in this way, we seek to show how change across time can be studied in an ethnomethodologically informed fashion.

References

  1. Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1982). The development of addition and subtraction problem-solving skills. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 9–24). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  2. Cicourel, A. V. (1970). The acquisition of social structure: Toward a developmental sociology of language and meaning. In J. Douglas (Ed.), Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge (pp. 136–168). Chicago: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
  3. Davis, R. B., & Maher, C. A. (1990). The nature of mathematics: What do we do when we “do mathematics”? In B. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 65–78). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  4. Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(3-4), 361–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. C. McKinney & E. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and developments (pp. 337–366). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  7. Goodwin, M. H. (1983). Aggravated correction and agreement in children’s conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 7(6), 657–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kintsch, W., & Greeno, J. (1985). Understanding and solving arithmetic word problems. Psychological Review, 92(1), 109–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Maher, C. A. (2005). How students structure their investigations and learn mathematics: Insights from a long-term study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Maher, C. A., & Yankelewitz, D. (2010). Representations as tools for building arguments. In C. A. Maher, A. B. Powell, & E. B. Uptegrove (Eds.), Combinatorics and reasoning: Representing, justifying and building isomorphisms (pp. 17–25). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maher, C. A., Powell, A. B., & Uptegrove, E. B. (Eds.). (2010). Combinatorics and reasoning: Representing, justifying and building isomorphisms. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Mannheim, K. (1952). On the interpretation of weltanschauung. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowledge: The collected works of Karl Mannheim V (pp. 33–83). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  15. Maynard, D., & Clayman, S. (1991). The diversity of ethnomethodology. Annual Review of Sociology, 17, 385–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation I-II. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Stigler, J. W., Fuson, K. C., Ham, M., & Kim, M. S. (1986). An analysis of addition and subtraction word problems in American and Soviet elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction, 3(3), 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zemel, A., & Koschmann, T. (2013). Recalibrating reference within a dual-space interaction environment. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8(1), 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy Koschmann
    • 1
  • Robert Sigley
    • 2
  • Alan Zemel
    • 3
  • Carolyn Maher
    • 4
  1. 1.Southern Illinois UniversityCarbondaleUSA
  2. 2.Texas State UniversitySan MarcosUSA
  3. 3.University at AlbanyAlbanyUSA
  4. 4.Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations