1. Uninterested, hard-to-reach pupils in secondary school mathematics:
Teacher’s puzzle
ABSTRACT: The aim of this assignment is to claim uninterested student’s attitude towards
mathematics as a central concern within mathematics classroom in secondary education, not
in the traditional sense usually teacher’s use it as an unchangeable, stable one, that causes
their students failure in mathematics, but as a powerful and vital aspect of both teacher and
researcher for further collaboration. Drawing on research evidence, a case is made that it is
never too late to change students’ attitude towards mathematics and this implies that it is
never late to change a teacher’s attitude towards his own teaching practices. The article also
raises concerns about the ability of the education system to positively address collaboration
between researchers and teachers in the classroom in a permanent basis for development
learning environments for students in mathematics classrooms with an identity of self-
efficacy and values, happy citizen of the future world.
Keywords: identity of uninterested learner, students’ attitudes towards mathematics,
engagement, motivation, teacher, researcher
In the fourth age BC Aristotle states: ‘those who educate children well are more to be
honoured than parents, for these only gave life, those the art of living well.’, and his grateful
student Alexander the Great some years later declares: ‘I am indebted to my father for living,
but to my teacher for living well’. Of course what is not mentioned so frequently is that,
Philippe, Alexander’s father searched a lot for his son’s teachers among the most famous
academics.
Since then a lot of things changed but families have still the same concern for their children’s
education, looking for the best schools and teachers to guarantee their well-living. Education

2. has become a human right for almost every child all over the world and Mathematics is
honoured to be - after pupils’ native tongue - the second compulsory subject for most years
of schooling. If we consider a Mathematics classroom as ‘a social space in which gender,
ability and other social identities are played out’ his role as a teacher is, nevertheless, crucial.
Educators, researchers and teachers work continuously to make sense of school, classroom,
mathematics, curriculum, children, knowledge, learning, teaching, tasks, activities, etc. For
any one of these notions a mass of information has been gathered, a lot of theories have been
developed, most of the time in contradiction to each other, in the best case complementary.
But how can theories, derived from psychology, sociology, philosophy and mathematics, help
the teacher solve the problems he faces in a mathematics classroom? It is well known that
every theory includes some and excludes others. Hence no matter which of them, consciously
or not, he adopts, a not belonging-marginalised student identity is formed, who is the black
sheep of every educational system, including the teachers who attribute the responsibility to
the student’s attitude towards mathematics, the family background and the previous teachers’
attitudes. Uninterested, in mathematics, students and sometimes whole classes are one of the
most popular topics discussed among teachers in professional meetings. Every teacher feels
uncomfortable with these students who most of them cause problems, that make teacher’s life
difficult, behaving in ways that teaching learning processes do not include. They ask their
colleagues how they handle these difficult cases, especially the less experienced ask for
advice. They express emotions of disappointment, when they try to apply strategies of
classroom management unsuccessfully. They ask the head teachers’ help and they, in turn,
try to make them be aligned with school’s rules, they punish them and they ask their parents’
help. In this unpleasant teaching condition, the teacher expects urgently material assistance in
the form of innovations, as Brousseau states: ‘there is a controversy involving innovators and
the defenders of action research about what didactique is, what it can do and what it should

3. do’ (Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics Didactique des Mathématiques, 1970–
1990). Is there any way in which mathematics education. Why during their pedagogical
meetings at school they talk about the same difficulties as their colleagues did many years
ago, in spite of the large development of Maths Education? Are they right when they say:
‘Yes, this is a fantastic idea, but how can I implement it in my class?’ winking at the teacher
next to them? Or when they complain that the research should provide them with ready-to-
use tools for their problems in the classroom?
Even though mathematics classrooms have similarities, they also have differences.
As Anna Sfard and Anna Prusak claim ‘different individuals act differently in the same
situations and differences notwithstanding, do different individuals’ actions often reveal a
distinct family resemblance’. Hence the teacher drawing on evidence of a previous research
should make his own research for his own unique classroom which ‘like every human
community, is an individual at its own scale of organization. It has a unique historical
trajectory, a unique development through time. But like every such individual on every scale,
it is also in some respects typical of its kind’ (Lemke 2000).
The teacher should take into account the complexity of the interactions between knowledge,
students and himself within the context of a particular class. His particular pedagogy which
positions makes available for his student? ‘Ideas, emotions and actions of participants are
shaped by the dynamic of interactional practices, and how positions available in discourse
can be realised as positioning in practice. It provides evidence of excitement and anxieties
felt by these pupils, showing how they are associated with their positioning in different
discursive practices. By analysing the positions occupied by each pupil in interaction, we
understand how hierarchical positions are (re)produced, as well as the role that emotions
play in adopting, modifying, ‘submitting to’, or claiming, a position’ (Jeff Evans, Candia
Morgan, Anna Tsatsaroni, 2006). And how these positions interact with his? To which extent

4. it is responsible for ‘the uninteresting, hard-to-reach student position’ which some students
occupy’ and what are the emotions he experiences adopting the position of not participating,
of the follower who expects his classmate’s help, who is not consistent with his homework
and his achievement is not as he expected?
Does he feel he wants to change his students’ attitude towards mathematics? This is the
turning point. What does he want to do? What about should he be aware? The first thing he is
aware of is that behind all these questions is hidden a whole mass of information that
Mathematics Education has gathered. Usually disappointed he stops trying under the shelter
of ideas putting the blame on family, previous teachers, not existing prerequisite knowledge,
lack of time, difficulty of Mathematics.
As Marshall and Drummond (2006) argue, teachers’ conceptions of learning are central to
understanding and enacting these practices. Or he starts questioning everything he does,
starting from the tasks; whether they are meaningful, the teaching methods; whether they are
engaging, in a few words he tries to find ways to change student’s attitude, to engage him in
working, to motivate him. But what are finally attitudes, engagement, motivation; these
controversially discussed multifaceted and mutually interacting notions?
We can say that in everyday life by the term attitude we mean someone’s liking or disliking
of a familiar target. The term ‘attitude’ is often used by teachers as a negative one to attribute
their students’ difficulties or failure in mathematics. The last forty years researchers make
experimentally studies on the construct ‘attitude’ giving it a multidimensional definition.
Everyone has his own point of you but it seems that they agree on the fact that there is a
relationship between students’ attitude towards mathematics and achievement in that.

5. For example, Frost et al., 1994; Leder, 1995 state that girls tend to have more negative
attitudes towards mathematics than boys,
McLeod, 1994, states that attitudes tend to become more negative as pupils move from
elementary to secondary school. Tony says: ‘In the primary school maths was my favourite
subject, but later I could not get it, I should work hard without success…... so disappointing’
and Haladyna et al., 1983, that the general attitude of the class towards mathematics is
related to
1) the quality of the teaching ‘since the day this new teacher came, mathematics has
proved to be the most boring subject, because he speaks continuously and we do nothing else
except coping what he is writing on the blackboard’
and to
2) The social-psychological climate of the class ‘although the teacher tries hard, all the
boys try to make noise and they don’t attend the lesson. They are afraid of being teacher’s pet
and when a student says he likes the lesson they laugh at him during the break’.
In this way theory justifies practice: As Ruffel, Mason and Allen (1998) state ‘Teachers'
attitude to mathematics is increasingly put forward as a dominant factor in children’s
attitudes to mathematics’. When the teacher feels that his students’ attitudes to his lesson are
negative and decides to intervene, the first thing he does is to be problematized for his own
attitude and practice. He tries to find out what is wrong, starting from his own positioning in
the class: his emotions and methods. ‘I always like teaching older students. I cannot stand
very young pupils.’
Markku Hannula has developed a framework for analysing attitude and can be used by the
teacher as an analytical tool for exploring his students’ attitudes. She builds a foundation

6. from the background of psychology of emotions and separates the observable category
‘student’s attitude towards mathematics’ into four different evaluative processes:
1. the emotions the student experiences during mathematics related activities;
It is remarkable that emotions in the mathematics class are not stable, but may
include both pleasant ‘well multiplications, additions, subtractions it was fun…..the best
time’ and unpleasant ones ‘it started being a little bit confusing, difficult and could not get it,
so disappointing,’, as John comments.
2. the emotions that the student automatically associates with the concept 'mathematics';
(‘all these letters instead of numbers….and geometry, with all these proofs…..was so
confusing and embarrassing’ )
3. evaluations of situations that the student expects to follow as a consequence of doing
mathematics;
4. The value of mathematics-related goals in the student's global goal structure. ‘Me,
now, I am going on with History I don’t need any maths.’
Goldin and DeBellis 1997 suggest four facets of affective states: emotional states, attitudes,
beliefs, and values/morals/ethics, which provide insight into the development of attitude and
Hannula uses to reconceptualise attitude with emotion and cognition as two central concepts
so intensely mutually interacting that can be seen as two sides of the same coin.
Although there is not simple recipe for the teacher, this framework of emotions,
associations, expectations, and values seem to be useful in describing attitudes and their
changes. The most important think is the way it is constructed as a theoretical view point for

7. an accurate interpretation of students’ behaviour, capable of steering future action. As Di
Martino and Zan say (2009) ‘The relationship is rarely told as stable, even by older students’
and, in contrary to what mathematics teachers in higher secondary classes think, it is never
too late to change students’ attitude towards mathematics.
Researchers have provided teachers with a powerful instrument for analysing, their students
attitude, but mainly theirs. They can take the responsibility of their teaching methods,
question their classroom culture. They first have to be aware of every student’s needs, in
order to help him reach his own potential. Mary is a competent mathematics teacher. She
never forgets the day her new mathematics teacher came to school. ‘She was a fantastic
teacher’ she says. ‘I used to hate mathematics before . I thought it was so boring and
nobody used to care about it in my class. It was a really terrible class, with many problems
due to the multi ethnicity of the students. She never discriminated anyone and in a few weeks
she gained the class’s respect, which had an influence on student’s attitude, they were
motivated and soon we turned to be the most creative mathematics class in the school.
Almost everybody was engaged and nobody could understand how she managed it.’, as
Berstein (1990) states: ‘If the culture of the teacher is to become part of the consciousness of
the child, then the culture of the child must first be in the consciousness of the teacher.’
But now how he can go along with that? What can be the trigger in students’ development?
What is engagement and how can the teacher engage his students with mathematics in a way
that mathematical learning takes place?
Again he is not alone in this attempt. There is a mass of research about engagement the
teacher can use to find his ‘unique’ way. A mass of information and interpretations is
available. Finn (1989, 1993) proposed the “participation-identification model” that describes

8. students' identification with school. In addition he suggested that students’ academic
engagement comprises three constructs: cognitive, affective and behavioural engagements.
1. Affective engagement implies a sense of belonging and an acceptance of the goals of
2. Cognitive should be:
Flexible vs. Rigid Problem Solving
Active vs. Passive Coping with Failure
Independent vs. Dependent Work Styles
Independent vs. Dependent Judgement
Preference for Hard Work vs. Preference for Easy work
3. Emotional
In the form of Anger Interest Nervousness
Happiness Sadness Curiosity
Boredom Discouragement Excitement
Behavioural
Class Participation vs. Uninvolvement
On-task vs. Off-task Behaviour
Extra-curricular Academically Oriented vs. Extra-curricular Non-academically Oriented
Career Plans
Classes Skipped

9. Tardiness
A framework for conceptualising and measuring engagement in mathematics was developed
by Kong, Wong, and Lam (2003) through research and validation, identify significant
markers of engagement. In this study they adopt these markers as a framework for
investigating, categorising and interpreting student engagement, and are as follows:
Affective engagement (Interest and achievement orientated by Anxiety and frustration)
Behavioural engagement (Attentiveness, Diligence, Time spent on task, Non-assigned time
spent on task
Cognitive engagement and strategies that could be drawn to succeed in effective learning, in
the form of:
• Surface Strategies (memorisation, practising, and test taking strategies)
• Deep Strategies (understanding, summarising, making connections, justifying)
• Reliance (on teachers/parents)
One would state that it is not realistic to say that a teacher can use all these constructs. But
every experienced teacher finds in all this research ways he acts, consciously and/or, most of
the time, unconsciously in his everyday practices. Such constructs are results from teachers’
practices and are powerful up to the day that a more viable idea can emerge: Because
Mathematics education is ‘a theory in my work, or, better, a set of thinking tools visible
through the results they yield, but it is not built as such … It is a temporary construct which
takes shape for and by empirical work.’ as Bourdieu claims in Wacquant, 1989. And this is
the only way teachers can use it in their attempt to interpret their students’ negative attitudes,
consequently to trigger them in mathematics learning. The means they use is the pedagogic

10. task which they should plan taking into account the fact that it should be useful and
purposeful. But how can this be feasible? In Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic
task design Janet Ainley, Dave Pratt and Alice Hansenb (2004) warn the teachers of the
problems they can face in planning tasks. The central idea is defined as ‘the planning
paradox’ in their one word: ‘If teachers plan from objectives, the tasks they set are likely to
be unrewarding for the pupils and mathematically impoverished. Planning from tasks may
increase pupils’ engagement but their activity is likely to be unfocused and learning difficult
to assess.’ The point they make is how the teachers can produce tasks, which give their
students the chance to be engaged in essential content set out by the curriculum in focused
and motivational ways. These two latter can be afforded by carefully selected tools which
connect the knowledge that students must gain with their everyday experiences.
Motivational ways raise an issue of what motivation is. For one more time we can find a huge
amount of research on this new construct, which is created to help us explain, predict and
influence behaviour. Within psychology one important approach to motivation has been to
distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Intrinsic motivation has emerged as an important phenomenon for educators— a natural
wellspring of learning and achievement that can be systematically catalysed or undermined
by parent and teacher practices. In students’ narratives as story tellers we can find witness of
this kind. ‘I like solving mathematical problems. It reminds me of my holidays spending
hours with my father playing cards, answering puzzles and solving strange problems, which
derived from mathematics, as I understood later. Our family’s habits….’ Intrinsic motivation
must not be undermined because it results in high-quality learning and creativity. However,
equally important can be the different types of motivation that fall into the category of
extrinsic motivation and is present in students’ narratives about their experiences. ‘I am not
sure that I really like maths, but I study hard because a good grade is important for studying

11. medicine which is my deepest desire’. In the classic literature, extrinsic motivation has
typically been characterized as a pale and impoverished (even though powerful) form of
motivation that contrasts with intrinsic motivation. In mathematics education not many
researchers have focused on motivation (See Evans & Wedege, 2004; Hannula, 2004b), and
only a few researchers have distinguished between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Holden
(2003) makes a distinction between intrinsic, extrinsic and contextual motivation. She
suggests that the students’ motivation always is governed by some kind of “rewards”.
According to her, students who are extrinsically motivated engage in tasks to obtain extrinsic
rewards, such as praise and positive feedback from the teacher. The students’ intrinsic
motivation is governed by intrinsic rewards, which concern developing understanding,
feeling powerful and enjoying the task. Students who are contextually motivated are doing
something to obtain contextual rewards, such as acknowledgement from peer students,
working with challenging tasks and seeing the usefulness of the task. Goodchild (2001)
relates extrinsic and intrinsic motivation with ego and task orientation and with performance
and learning goals. According to him a student is extrinsically motivated when he is doing
something because it leads to an outcome external to the task, such as gaining approval or
proving self-worth. A student is intrinsically motivated when he considers the task to have a
value for its own sake; he is engaging in the task in order to understand. Evans and Wedege
(2004) consider people’s motivation and resistance to learn mathematics as interrelated
phenomena. They present and discuss a number of meanings of these two terms as used in
mathematics education and adult education. In Hannula’s dissertation his approach to
motivation involves needs and goals, rather than intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Hannula,
2004a).
Kjersti Wæge in Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Versus Social and Instrumental Rationale
for Learning Mathematics (2007) discusses the relation between two different concepts of

12. motivation for learning mathematics: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as defined in Self
Determination Theory and Mellin-Olsen’s concept of rationale for learning mathematics in
activity theory’s point of view. Within Self Determination Theory, as she claims, one
suggests that extrinsic motivation varies considerably in its relative autonomy and thus can
either reflect external control or true self-regulation, comparing to Mellin-Olsen’s two
rationales for learning mathematics in school; an S-rationale (Social rationale) and an I-
rationale (Instrumental rationale). Both points of views are very interesting for the teacher
and can help him decide in which way he could motivate his student by analysing his attitude
and at what extend he could use them depending on his teaching practices and his own
ideology.
What is undoubtedly clear is the fact that mathematics teachers cannot always rely on
intrinsic motivation to foster learning. Many of the tasks, their students should perform,
despite their efforts, are not inherently interesting or enjoyable. That’s why knowing how to
promote more active and volitional forms of extrinsic motivation becomes an essential
strategy for successful teaching.
When the teacher first meets all these information about these meaningful, for his work,
constructs usually has the same feeling with his uninterested in mathematics, unwilling to
cooperate student. How can he cope with all this information? Is it worthy to go on or the
time available is so short that the results are doubtful? The most interesting thing that is
revealed by Alexander’s and Aristotle’s quotes in the beginning of this assignment is the hint
that students and their teachers talk about the same stories. Their attitudes towards the
meaning of teaching and learning are shaped in a strange interaction. The teacher who gives
up in front of this difficulty putting the blame on other factors beyond him (‘I can do nothing
but wait’) is honoured with the most difficult and failing students. Others find some of these
ideas charming and decide to use it. ‘Collaborative learning is very interesting’ or ‘Tasks

13. with computers are very motivating for students’ ‘The curriculum is very demanding, I
should expect less from them’ are some ideas they have, especially those who decide to
interview their students and take for granted everything they say about what they think that is
discouraging for them in being more successful.
Every attempt is important and gives the teacher insight for parts of the work. A teacher
whose teaching method is traditionally oriented in teacher centred methods finds interesting
the change in some students’ positioning when he decides to ask them work collaboratively.
He likes it, although he faces problems by others who prefer working individually, or by
ways students’ new positionings interact in a disharmonic way: ‘He tells me what to do and
does not listen to me’, ‘she behaves as if she were my teacher, I cannot stand it!’. Working
with digital technology is very popular among students (‘maths seems to have a different
dimension, it is a fantastic experience to see how functional and easy to understand are
graphs when using computers’) but new problems appear for the teacher who is not familiar
with it like the ‘planning paradox’, which we have mentioned before when talking about
Ainley and Pratt’s work. Some in front of these difficulties give up and others begin to realise
that teaching is a complicated process, in which sometimes a teacher needs to be a student in
new learning processes. The latter goes on trying new methods, enjoying insight and skills he
had not before. This is the moment that becomes aware of the difficulties that all, without
exception –hopefully- students face in different fields of the teaching learning process. Every
student can be uninterested in different ways and under some special conditions can shape a
hard-to-reach identity.
This is the moment we can state that in turn, it is never late for a change in a teacher’s
attitude towards teaching mathematics. In Brousseau’s sense, the didactic contract is broken
this time for the teacher. The situation reminds him of The Nine Dot Puzzle, when he should
draw no more than four straight lines (without lifting the pencil from the paper) which will

14. cross through all nine dots, that shape a square. A solution was difficult to find until he was
willing to ‘think outside the box’. Again Mathematics education research is going to give him
the ‘tool’.
How his student from a curiosity machine, as every child is, turned to a mathematical idiot?
Brouseau gives an interesting theoretical framework for what he calls situation didactic: it
consists of the learners, the teachers, the mathematical content and the classroom ethos, as
well as the social and institutional forces acting upon that situation, including government
directives such as a National Curriculum statement, inspection and testing regimes , parental
and community pressures and so on (milieu).
He states that learning takes place when the didactic contract is broken. For every student it
can happen in different ways, for which is a teacher’s duty to look individually. When he
neglects, an uninterested, hard-to-reach identity is shaped that sounds loudly, even in silence.
Every experienced teacher can identify it watching, for example, video clips from classrooms
practices all over the world in the most different didactic contacts, even conducted by the best
teachers. The ways depend on his pedagogy, ideology, and teaching practice. Ways derive
from psychology and can be applied even in short time.
What is in question is how every student can reach his potential and become the more
mathematically literate he can. He must be the researcher of his own practice, of his students’
special needs, gathering information from other colleagues, the parents/carers, the students. A
new learning contract among teacher and student must be signed. He must take into account
everything he is said, starting from questioning his own expectations (individualised), tasks
(adapted to everyone’s potential- giving the chance everybody to be motivated), guarantee
that the contract is kept by both parts so that new habits could be formed with the hope new
engaged –not marginalised- identities are possibly shaped. Even if it does not happen the

15. commitment will give emotions worth experiencing and insight for facing new undesired
situations.
It sounds utopic and perhaps it is, but doing something is always more than doing nothing.
All the students have something to learn in Bernstein’s ‘totally pedagogised society which is
shaped through pedagogy rather than productive processes’. Mathematics is a very important
subject which supplies skills of competence, especially for those who finish compulsory
education mathematically illiterate (‘I have learned some maths (generally) which is good
enough, but then in Year 10-13 you have to learn some advanced maths, which I don’t think
that a lot of people are going to use in their everyday life. I am going on with IT, Computers
etc. The only thing I need to know from maths is how many wires you need 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
nothing else, you only need practical skills’, says George who after 10 years of schooling
cannot recall anything else). Of course it is a difficult process for the teacher and sometimes
unsuccessful but he is not alone in this attempt. In the era of globalisation new conditions are
formed that need to be interpreted. Researchers from all over the world in collaboration with
the teachers exchange aspects of every facet of the educational systems, using qualitative,
quantitative and mixed methods they measure students’ performance in mathematics. The
role of parents, teachers, students and curriculum in countries where students have a high
attainment is researched. On the other hand, digital technology provides new teaching tools
and environments that create new mathematics. Constructivism gave birth to constructionism
and other learning theories in community of practice. A very interesting aspect of
participants’ engagement , imagination and alignment in the activity and practice of this
specified community with its own purposes and goals, is stated by Wegner 1998 and Lave
1991 in a community that sounds perfect. In universities the creation of inquiry communities
between didacticians and teachers in a co learning inquiry, a mode of developmental research
in which knowledge and practice develop through the inquiry activity of the people engaged

16. (Jaworski, 2004a, 2006), to explore ways of improving learning environments for students in
mathematics classrooms. Research both charts the developmental process and is a tool for
development learning environments for students in mathematics classrooms.
This seems to be the greatest hope for the teacher, who expects research of his own unique
environment by experts to provide him and his students with powerful and vital aspects of
understanding the ways in which this ‘complex site of political and social influences, socio-
cultural interactions, and multiple positioning involving class, gender, ethnicity, teacher–
student relations, and other discursive practices in which power and knowledge are situated’’
(Lerman, 2001a, p.44), for helping with shaping an identity of a citizen of the world with
values and competence.
Until then professional mathematics teachers will share with researchers their inquiries and
fears in MA Mathematics Education classes in the same strange, charming and unique
relationship of the kind of teacher and student.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I should like to thank most sincerely Candia Morgan, Cathy Smith, Melissa Rodd, Eirini
Geraniou, Dave Pratt for their interesting stories I heard during the sessions of ‘Issues in
Mathematics Education’ and last, but not least I want to thank all my students of so many
years who trusted me for their mathematics educations.
MAGDALINI KOKKALIARI
KOK11094464
MMAMAT_04
MA STUDENT ()

17. MATHEMATICS EDUCATION
INSTITUTE OF RDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF LONDON
FEBRUARY 2012
REFERENCES
Ainley, J., Pratt, D. and Hansen, A. (2006). Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic
task design, British Educational Research Journal. 32(1), 23-38.
Sfard, A. & Prusak, A. (2005). Identity that makes a difference: Substantial learning as
closing the gap between actual and designated identities. In H.L. Chick & J.L. Vincent (Eds.)
Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 37-52), Department of Science and Mathematics
Education, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Haladyna, T., Shaughnessy, J., & Shaughnessy, M. (1983). A causal analysis of attitude
toward mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 19–29
Hart, L. (1989). Describing the affective domain: Saying what we mean. In D. Mc Leod & V.
M. Adams (Eds.), Affect and mathematical problem solving (pp. 37–45). New York:
Springer.
Kulm, G. (1980). Research on mathematics attitude. In R. J. Shumway (Ed.), Research in
mathematics education (pp. 356–387). Reston, VA: NCTM.

18. Lemke, Thomas (2000) ‘Neoliberalismus, Staat und Selbsttechnologien. Ein kritischer
Überblick über die governmentality studies’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 41 (1): 31–47.
JEFF EVANS, CANDIA MORGAN AND ANNA TSATSARONI DISCURSIVE
POSITIONING AND EMOTION IN SCHOOL MATHEMATICS PRACTIC
Marshall, B., and Drummond, M. J. (2006). How teachers engage with Assessment
for Learning: lessons from the classroom. Research Papers in Education, 21(2), 133-149.ES
2006
Neale, D. (1969). The role of attitudes in learning mathematics. The rithmetic Teacher, Dec.,
631–641.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991.). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral articipation.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
Jaworski, B. (2005). Learning communities in mathematics: Creating an inquiry community
between teachers and didacticians. In R. Barwell & A. Noyes (Eds.), Research in
mathematics education: Papers of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics
(Vol. 7, pp. 101–119).London: BSRLM
Brousseau Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics Didactique des Mathématiques,
1970–1990
Frost, L. A., Hyde, J. S. & Fennema, E. 1994. Gender, mathematics performance, and
mathematics related attitudes adn affect: a meta-analytic syntehesis. International Journal of
Educational Research 21 (4), 373-385.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in

19. human behavior. New York: Plenum Publishing Co.
Ruffell, M. Mason, J & Allen, B. (1998) Studying attitudes to Mathematics,
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35, 1-18
Di Martino and Zan say (2009) ‘Me and Maths’ University of Pisa
Hannula, M.S. (2002a). Attitude towards mathematics: emotions, expectations and values.
Educational Studies in Mathematics 49 (1), 25-46
Berstein (1990) Class, codes and control, vol. 4: the structuring of pedagogic discourse.
London, R Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research,
59, 117-142.
Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk . Washington, DC: U.S.
Department
of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Available on the Internet.outledge.
Evans, J., & Wedege, T. (2004). Motivation and resistance to learning mathematics in a
lifelong perspective. Paper presented at the 10th International Congress on Mathematical
Education, http: Hannula, M. S. (2004b). Regulation motivation in mathematics. Paper
presented at the 10th International Congress on Mathematical Education,
http://www.icme10.dk/, TSG 24, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Holden, I. M. (2003). Matematikk blir gøy - gjennom et viktig samspill mellom ytre
og indre motivasjon. In B. Grevholm (Ed.), Matematikk for skolen (pp. 27-50).
Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.//www.icme10.dk/, TSG 6, Copenhagen, Denmark.

20. Kong, Q., Wong, N., & Lam, C. (2003). Student engagement in mathematics: Development
of instrument and validation of construct. athematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 4-
21.
Goodchild, B. and Cole, I. (2001) “Social Balance and Mixed Neighbourhoods in Britain
since 1979: a review of discourse and practice in social housing”, Environment and Planning
D: Society and Space 19: 103-121.
Jeff Evans-Tine Wedege 2004 Motivation and resistance to learning mathematics in a
lifelong perspective 10th International Congress on Mathematical Education
Lerman, S. (2001a). A review of research perspectives on mathematics teacher education. In
F. Lin & T. J. Cooney (Eds.), Making sense of mathematics teacher education (pp. 33-52).
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge,
MA: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. Resnick, J. Levine, and
S. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pages 63-82). Washington, DC:
APA.