{"title":"成文法与系统功能语言学相结合:研究(数学教师教育者)语言的方法论","authors":"Tracy Helliwell, Andreas Ebbelind","doi":"10.1007/s10857-024-09619-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>As mathematics teacher educators (MTEs), we are motivated by the lack of research concerning the language that MTEs use in initial teacher education settings. In this paper, we turn our attention towards developing a methodological approach to studying the language-in-use during teacher education situations, with a specific focus on the language of the MTE in the form of a monologue. The methodological approach that we present draws upon two theoretical perspectives, specifically, the situated cognition theory of enactivism and the social semiotic perspective of systemic functional linguistics (SFL). To develop this methodology, we explore both of these theoretical perspectives, focussing on their respective conceptualisations of language, from which we derive a set of methodological principles and practices. A significant feature of the methodology presented in this paper, is that it takes into account the researchers’ relationships with the subject of research. Thus we propose this methodology as being of particular significance to practitioner–researchers studying the language of other practitioners within the same field (e.g. MTEs studying the language of other MTEs), as well as to the study of one’s own use of language in mathematics education settings. From our methodological perspective we explore the meaning of quality research, proposing relevant criteria. We exemplify the methodological principles and practices by analysing a transcript of a mathematics teacher education lecture for prospective primary teachers in Sweden.</p>","PeriodicalId":47442,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combining enactivism and systemic functional linguistics: a methodology for examining (mathematics teacher educator) language\",\"authors\":\"Tracy Helliwell, Andreas Ebbelind\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10857-024-09619-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>As mathematics teacher educators (MTEs), we are motivated by the lack of research concerning the language that MTEs use in initial teacher education settings. In this paper, we turn our attention towards developing a methodological approach to studying the language-in-use during teacher education situations, with a specific focus on the language of the MTE in the form of a monologue. The methodological approach that we present draws upon two theoretical perspectives, specifically, the situated cognition theory of enactivism and the social semiotic perspective of systemic functional linguistics (SFL). To develop this methodology, we explore both of these theoretical perspectives, focussing on their respective conceptualisations of language, from which we derive a set of methodological principles and practices. A significant feature of the methodology presented in this paper, is that it takes into account the researchers’ relationships with the subject of research. Thus we propose this methodology as being of particular significance to practitioner–researchers studying the language of other practitioners within the same field (e.g. MTEs studying the language of other MTEs), as well as to the study of one’s own use of language in mathematics education settings. From our methodological perspective we explore the meaning of quality research, proposing relevant criteria. We exemplify the methodological principles and practices by analysing a transcript of a mathematics teacher education lecture for prospective primary teachers in Sweden.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09619-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09619-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Combining enactivism and systemic functional linguistics: a methodology for examining (mathematics teacher educator) language
As mathematics teacher educators (MTEs), we are motivated by the lack of research concerning the language that MTEs use in initial teacher education settings. In this paper, we turn our attention towards developing a methodological approach to studying the language-in-use during teacher education situations, with a specific focus on the language of the MTE in the form of a monologue. The methodological approach that we present draws upon two theoretical perspectives, specifically, the situated cognition theory of enactivism and the social semiotic perspective of systemic functional linguistics (SFL). To develop this methodology, we explore both of these theoretical perspectives, focussing on their respective conceptualisations of language, from which we derive a set of methodological principles and practices. A significant feature of the methodology presented in this paper, is that it takes into account the researchers’ relationships with the subject of research. Thus we propose this methodology as being of particular significance to practitioner–researchers studying the language of other practitioners within the same field (e.g. MTEs studying the language of other MTEs), as well as to the study of one’s own use of language in mathematics education settings. From our methodological perspective we explore the meaning of quality research, proposing relevant criteria. We exemplify the methodological principles and practices by analysing a transcript of a mathematics teacher education lecture for prospective primary teachers in Sweden.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education (JMTE) is devoted to research into the education of mathematics teachers and development of teaching that promotes students'' successful learning of mathematics. JMTE focuses on all stages of professional development of mathematics teachers and teacher-educators and serves as a forum for considering institutional, societal and cultural influences that impact on teachers'' learning, and ultimately that of their students. Critical analyses of particular programmes, development initiatives, technology, assessment, teaching diverse populations and policy matters, as these topics relate to the main focuses of the journal, are welcome. All papers are rigorously refereed.
Papers may be submitted to one of three sections of JMTE as follows: Research papers: these papers should reflect the main focuses of the journal identified above and should be of more than local or national interest.
Mathematics Teacher Education Around the World: these papers focus on programmes and issues of national significance that could be of wider interest or influence.
Reader Commentary: these are short contributions; for example, offering a response to a paper published in JMTE or developing a theoretical idea. Authors should state clearly the section to which they are submitting a paper. As general guidance, papers should not normally exceed the following word lengths: (1) 10,000 words; (2) 5,000 words; (3) 3,000 words. Maximum word lengths exclude references, figures, appendices, etc.
Critiques of reports or books that relate to the main focuses of JMTE appear as appropriate.