The Australian Lexicon: Exploring Classroom Practice Named by Middle School Mathematics Teachers

• In Event: The Lexicon Project: Examining the Content, Structure, and Implications of Pedagogical Naming Systems From Different Cultures

Abstract

Aim
The goal of the Australian research team was to document the professional lexicon employed by teachers in Australia to describe the phenomena of the middle school mathematics classroom. It is through their professional lexicon, “the vocabulary of a person, language, or branch of knowledge” (Stevenson, 2015), that teachers are able to reflect on and improve their practice.

Perspective
Little is known about the professional vocabulary in use by Australian middle school mathematics teachers to describe the phenomena of the classroom (Grossman et al., 2009). This is similar to some other contexts. For example, Lampert (2000) has described teachers’ professional (or technical) language as underdeveloped. Connell (2009) has observed that the teaching profession’s organisational culture does not always support “the informal processes by which practical know-how is passed to new teachers in on-the-job learning” (p. 223) and that a culture that might do so needs to be purposefully fostered.

Methods and techniques
A team of Australian researchers and experienced teachers viewed a set of video recordings, from nine different English and non-English speaking communities, and asked themselves: “What do you see that you can name?” The essential point was to record single words or short phrases that are used by middle school mathematics teachers with a consistent and agreed meaning. Each term was operationalized with a description, examples and non-examples. A process of local and then national validation was subsequently pursued to refine and ratify the lexicon.

Data
The Australian National Lexicon consists of 63 terms. The lexical items are organized in five categories: Administration (8 terms); Assessment (11 terms); Classroom Management (6 terms); Learning Strategies (27 terms) and Teaching Strategies (50 terms). The dimensions: ‘Agency’ and whether the lexical term referred to ‘Form’ (referring to an activity or practice that is easily recognizable) or its ‘Function’ (requires additional interpretation) were used to categorise the data further.

Results/Conclusions
The Australian National Lexicon is generic in nature (that is, it appears applicable to other disciplines). In terms of agency, the student’s voice and participation in the classroom is a significant characteristic of the Australian lexicon (37 terms). Additionally, the Form versus Function distinction reveals a purpose-oriented lexicon (45 terms designating function rather than form). A handful of terms might be described as multi-purpose (the same named activity serving a variety of functions, some of which may have their own lexical term). For example, ‘Worked Example’ might be used to introduce a new skill, review a homework task or model an approach to a worded problem.

Significance
The local intention of this research was to provide insight into the naming system employed by mathematics teachers in Australia in relation to their classroom practice and to provide the basis for comparison with the lexicons of other communities. From this foundation, we hope to inform efforts to better equip contemporary mathematics teachers with a sophisticated lexicon to shape their professional practice.

Authors

• Carmel Mesiti, University of Melbourne

• David J. Clarke, University of Melbourne

• Hilary Hollingsworth, Australian Council for Educational Research