Search

Grounded in a desire to explore how the field of culturally responsive pedagogy (CRP) and its connected sub-fields is constructed/shaped in and through mathematics education research, the study reported on in this paper sought to understand how researchers/scholars situate, or position their research. The study began from a conceptualization of CRP as a term that encompasses the areas (or sub-fields) of Indigenous education [IE], equity-based research [E-b], critical mathematics [CM], ethnomathematics [EM], social justice [SJ], and language diversity [LD]. By asking mathematics education scholars to position their research within this conceptualization, this paper points to the different themes or 'noticings' that summarize the ways in which they described their research and/or the sub-fields. As mathematics education scholars ourselves, this paper is part of our journey to explore these varied and interconnected terms/fields and to come to a more nuanced understanding of how they interact so that we (and others) might act within our research and our classrooms with a clear aim to disrupt. In our efforts to portray some of the fluidity that we noticed, we each present a model that attempts to capture our thinking and positioning within the conceptualization, and we invite the reader to do the same.

The Research Committee focuses on several systemic barriers that have impeded the equitable development of students' mathematics knowledge, including school and school-system structures that foster the social reproduction of inequity. To develop an equitable context for all students to learn mathematics, the Research Committee posits that we need to change beliefs about students, about particular groups of students, about how students learn, and about grouping students.

As part of a larger project focused on decolonising mathematics education for Aboriginal students in Atlantic Canada, this article reports on the role of the Mi'kmaw language in mathematics teaching. By exploring how mathematical concepts are talked about (or not talked about) in the Mi'kmaw language, teachers and researchers can gain insight into how Mi'kmaw children think about mathematical concepts. It is argued that much can be learned by asking questions such as "What's the word for... ?" or "Is there a word for... ?" Numerous examples of such conversations are presented. It is argued that particular complexities arise when words such as "flat" and "middle" are taken-for-granted as shared, but in fact do not have common use in the Mi'kmaw language. By understanding these complexities and being aware of the potential challenges for Mi'kmaw learners, teachers can better meet the needs of these students. It is argued that understanding Aboriginal languages can provide valuable insight to support Aboriginal learners in mathematics.

As part of a larger project focused on transforming mathematics education for Aboriginal students in Atlantic Canada, this paper reports on the role of the Mi'kmaw language in mathematics teaching. Examining how mathematical concepts are described in Mi'kmaq gives insight into ways of thinking. Shifting classroom discussions to reflect Mi'kmaw verb-based grammar structures, referred to as "verbification", is described through the example of a grade 3 lesson on prisms and pyramids. "Verbification" shows tremendous promise as a way to support Mi'kmaw learners as they negotiate their space between school-based mathematics and their own cultural ways of knowing and doing mathematics.