Iman C.

Chahine, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA

Delineating the Epistemological Trajectory of Learning Theories:

Implications for Mathematics Teaching and Learning
The purpose of this paper is to delineate the trajectory of fundamental learning theories and the
way these theories have impacted the teaching and learning of mathematics over more than half
a century. We argue that a critical examination of the depiction of learning theories and their
inherent implications for the teaching of mathematics afford an understanding of the
hierarchical evolution of the field of mathematics education. Needless to say, examining various
learning theories in the mathematics education context unpacks epistemological and
ontological core issues underlying the teaching and learning of vital topics that are assumed to
account for the changes in global economics and business in a STEM world.

Introduction fundamental problems facing education

The quest to explore how people locally and globally. In a highly dynamic
learn mathematics has been a perennial and versatile world, unfolding the best
concern for decades. For some time now, practices particularly for teaching
philosophers and learning theorists have mathematics and sciences instigates a
been incessantly searching for optimal pressing need for consideration by educators
conditions under which learning occurs. A and policy makers. For mathematics
tremendous bulk of contesting theories has education, the push toward standards-based
evolved, thriving to explain the roles of the curricula governed by accountability and
learner and the teacher when engaged in acts teaching effectiveness dogmas juxtaposed
of learning and teaching. Notwithstanding with policies to enact cutting edge
the fact that many learning theories differ in educational interventions in an ever-
their empirical manifestations, nonetheless changing economy command inevitable
the underlying epistemologies are challenges that cannot be overlooked. The
unequivocally analogous. highly political dynamics that depict the way
At the turn of the 21st century, the standards are drafted and sanctioned in
necessity to prepare children for a rapidly terms of content and pedagogy are
changing world has been consistently determining the way educational policies are
reiterated in the literature (Csikszentmihalyi institutionalized and eventually endorsed at
& Schneider, 2000; Cornell & Hartman, the grass roots level.
2007; Drucker, 2010). With the tumultuous Nevertheless, recent studies on
political and economic climate prevailing student motivation, attitudes and self-
worldwide exacerbated by challenges efficacy have shown that unless students are
emerging in the rapidly changing context of cognitively and emotionally invested in
new technologies and globalization, there is what they are learning, little knowledge will
an unprecedented need to capitalize on how be acquired (Friedman, 2006; Furner &
best to educate future generations. A critical Gonzalez-DeHass, 2011). Naturally,
examination of the trajectories that various designing learning environments that can
theories of learning have taken since the last trigger students’ natural curiosity and
century provides a clear explanation on the stimulate their interest will significantly
2013 Mathitudes 1
impact their learning. Thompson and thus provide sufficient support to students in
Thornton (2002) found that when students learning the content.
are intrinsically motivated they are eager to This leads us to the following
learn. Yair (2000) argues that, “students’ questions: How did our understanding of
interest in what they learn, and their sense of how students learn develop in light of
enjoyment while learning, are highly widened exposure to subsequent research
correlated with the outcomes of learning” (p. efforts in educational and cognitive
193). Furner and Berman (2003) found that psychology? And what are the major
teachers need to do more in the way they learning theories that have impacted
teach math to address attitudes toward math frequent paradigm shifts in the field of
and mathematics anxiety in the classroom. mathematics education?
However, research has suggested that The purpose of this paper is to
motivation of adolescents decline as they delineate the trajectory of fundamental
progress through junior and senior high learning theories and the way these theories
school (Eccles, Midgley, et al., 1993; have impacted the teaching and learning of
Gonzalez, 2002; Hidi & Harackiewicz, mathematics over more than half a century.
2000; Williams & Stockdale, 2004). We argue that a critical examination of the
Additionally, the value children place on depiction of learning theories and their
many academic activities, particularly inherent implications for the teaching of
mathematics and their beliefs about the mathematics affords an understanding of the
usefulness of school decline as they get hierarchical evolution of the field of
older (Wigfield, Eccles, & Rodriquez, mathematics education. Needless to say,
1998). Today, students are more often examining various learning theories in the
described as “physically present but mathematics education context unpacks
psychologically absent” and thus are less epistemological and ontological core issues
likely to actively and enthusiastically engage underlying the teaching and learning of vital
in learning. Recently, student lack of topics that are assumed to account for the
motivation in the mathematics classroom changes in global economies.
has been a critical national concern in light Drawing on extensive literature
of efforts to improve STEM (Science, related to learning theories that have
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) emerged in the past two centuries, and
education in the United States. One concern examining critically possible formulations
in particular is that the pipeline of students on how mathematical knowledge and
entering STEM does not meet the current problem solving activity can be constructed,
demand for future scientists and engineers. we highlight important implications that, we
One of the reasons attributed to the attrition argue, provide the most compelling
rate of students embarking on a degree in explanation of how students learn
STEM is students’ underperformance in mathematics. By virtually appealing to
high school mathematics and their research on the cognitive as well as the
inadequate preparation in rigorous social construction of mathematical
mathematics content. Hence, addressing this knowledge, we explore various trends in
national need requires research and teaching and learning practices proposed by
development of the best pathways to each perspective and investigate their
remediate the teaching of mathematics and practical significance and implications in the
mathematics classroom.

2013 Mathitudes 2
 We begin with a brief overview of completely characterized in terms of stimuli
major “grand” theories of learning, namely and responses relations. Almost all
those of Behaviorism, Cognitivism, behaviorists describe "knowledge" as simply
Constructivism, and Social Constructivism. a succession of stimulus-response chain
More concisely, we examine contributions acquired through conditioning. Behaviorists
of cognitive and socio-cognitive theorists believe that learning is observable and is
who advanced learning epistemologies that directly evidenced by a change in behavior.
transformed mainstream perspectives on This theory has been criticized as being a
learning mechanisms. We expand the theory of animal and human learning that
argument further to discuss the implications only focuses on objectively observable
of these theories with regards to addressing behaviors that discounts mental activities
students’ attitudes and motivation in the (Tuckman, 1992). Attacked and refuted by
mathematics classroom. Finally, we provide radical behaviorists, in particular by Skinner
an account of possible contributions of (1938), behaviorism was abandoned in favor
complexity science to the teaching and of operant conditioning where events in the
learning of mathematics. environment determine and shape desired
behavior (Post, 1988).Though this theory
Theories of Learning was prevalent from the 1950’s through
A handful of research studies 1970’s, it is still alive in the minds and
classified learning theories according to practices of many educators in the 21st
where these theories stand relative to four century.
main categories: the nature of knowledge; In search for a more “humanistic”
existence of mental representations; causal theory of learning, Neobehaviorism emerged
relationship between mental relationships calling for some mental mechanism that
and behavior; and the origin of knowledge mediates between situations that elicit
(Illeris, 2004; Pritchard, 2005). Based on the behaviors i.e. stimuli and specific behaviors
above-mentioned categories, Byrnes (2007) i.e. responses (Tuckman, 1992). In his book
established three major groups that the conditions of learning, Gagné, a leading
encompassed Meta-Theoretical Belief Neobehaviorist, explains “ the occurrence of
Systems (MTBS): 1) Behaviorism, learning is inferred from a difference in
Neobehaviorism, and Cognitivism; 2) human being’s performance as exhibited
Structuralism and Functionalism; and 3) before and after being placed in a ‘learning
Nativism, Empiricism, and Constructivism. situation’” (1965, p.20).
Each of these groups comprises a spectrum When identifying the conditions
of ideologies, perspectives and belief necessary for learning to occur, Gagné
systems that, we believe, can potentially (1965) cited five “categories of capabilities”
explain the systemic evolution and which he defined as “conditions internal to
acquisition of knowledge. the learner” (p.21). These capabilities
include: intellectual, cognitive, verbal,
Behaviorism, Neobehaviorism, and motor and attitudes. While for Thorndike
Cognitivism learning is one and only, Gagné (1965)
Behaviorists, including Edward L. spoke of eight varieties of learning, or
Thorndyke (1898), argue that learning is the external conditions each necessitating
acquisition of new behavior that can be different capability and internal conditions,
manipulated by the environment and may be required from the learner. These types are

2013 Mathitudes 3
seemingly cumulative and hierarchical such part in the learning process, uses internal
that each type is built on its prerequisite, the mental structures to organize, transform and
highest in the hierarchy being problem- retrieve information when acting on a
solving or type 8. The hierarchy includes: learning environment (Chahine, under
Problem-solving; Principle learning; review). As such, learning is intrinsic,
Concept learning; Multiple discrimination holistic and personal to the individual and
learning; Verbal associations; Stimulus- can be enhanced through interactions with
response learning, and Signal learning. others and with proper physical materials in
Gagné also argued that for any learning to the environment. A closer look at the works
take place at any level special attention of these theorists merits our discussion of
should be given to its prerequisites. learning theories.
Advocating the claims that the whole (goal
or outcome) is the sum of its parts and that Piaget's Developmental Theory
learning is rather specific and goal-directed, A prominent Cognitivist in the 20th
Gagné (1965) established task analysis as a century is the Swiss biologist and
technique that pinpoints conditions or psychologist Jean Piaget (1896-1980).
behavioral objectives under which learning Piaget is renowned for constructing a highly
of a certain goal occurs. With a highlighted influential model of intellectual
emphasis on “outcome content” (what to development and learning. Piaget's
learn) rather than the process (how to learn), developmental theory is based on the idea
instruction was perceived to proceed from that the child builds cognitive mental
prerequisite skills to desired goals. Other structures in an attempt to make sense of his
important personal international factors such or her environment (Piaget, 1952). These
as motivation and establishment of attitudes stages, at least for Swiss school children,
and beliefs are ignored in favor of achieving increase in sophistication with development
behavioral objectives. Many drawbacks of and include: Sensorimotor stage (birth - 2
Gagné’s guided approach to learning have years old) where the child, through physical
been frequently cited in the literature, such interaction with his or her environment,
as limited transfer and neglecting other builds a set of concepts about reality and
important forms of learning such as informal how it works. Preoperational stage (ages 2-
and discovery learning (Post, 1988; 7) in which the child is not yet capable of
Tuckman, 1992). abstract conceptualization and therefore
On the other hand, theorists who needs exposure to concrete physical
have given more weight to cognitive situations. The primary deficiency at this
explanations and mental structures are stage is what Piaget (1952) calls the
retained near the cognitive end of the reversibility principle where the child
continuum and are referred to as Cognitivists cannot grasp the idea of conservation of
(Byrnes, 1992). Cognitivists such as Piaget, quantity. Concrete operations (ages 7-11)
Bruner, and Dienes see knowledge as where physical experience accumulates, the
actively constructed by the learner in child starts to conceptualize, creating logical
response to his/her interaction with the structures that explain his or her physical
environment. In contrast to Neobehaviorists, experiences. He further claims that abstract
Cognitivists emphasize the “how” of problem-solving is also possible at this
learning rather than the “what”. In stage. Although a child’s actions are
Cognitivists’ views, the learner, an active internalized and reversible, Piaget (1952)

2013 Mathitudes 4
explains that the child cannot deal with Thus, Piaget does not view intelligence in
possibilities that are outside the realm of terms of content or amount of knowledge,
his/her direct experience, and finally formal but rather as an arrangement or structure and
operations (beginning at ages 11-15) where a way in which information is organized.
the child is capable of constructing formal Other developmental factors that contribute
operational definitions and thus, abstract to cognitive development include
concepts maturation, active experience social
One of the significant implications of interaction, and equilibration or self-
Piaget’s developmental theory is related to regulation.
teaching basic concepts. A direct A basic tenet of learning by
assumption is that a child should be helped discovery or exploration requires a vigorous
to progressively proceed from the concrete exposure to and involvement with the
to the more abstract modes of thought. Much environment. A direct implication of
of the mathematics taught following Piaget’s theory is the focus on development
traditional curricula contradicts this of schemata that potentially facilitates
assumption, through teaching by telling problem-solving. The developmental stages
formal explanations of concepts are delineated by Piaget are highly relevant to
presented to the child in a different mode of the teaching and learning of mathematical
thought than his own. concepts. For example, at the primary level,
In adapting to his/her environment students can be taught conservation
thus avoiding and minimizing mathematics problems in late elementary and early
anxiety, Piaget (1977) contends that middle level through tasks involving
individuals use two mechanisms: seriation and classification. Moreover,
Assimilation and accommodation. structuring the physical environment by
Assimilation, which involves incorporating making multiple learning centers where
new ideas into existing schemata in students can be actively and purposefully
Piagetian theory, is somehow similar to the involved in the learning process is necessary
Behaviorists’ concept of stimulus where to enhance students’ attitudes toward math
having learned to respond to one stimulus and motivation. In addition, utilizing hands-
makes it easy to respond to another similar on activities with varieties of manipulatives
stimulus. Accommodation, on the other and multiple physical embodiments helps
hand, involves modifying existing schemata children learn operations appropriate to their
to fit the newly assimilated information. level of development. Piaget’s theory calls
Striking a balance or equilibrium between for more emphasis on integrative themes,
both assimilation and accommodation is the like probability and statistics in early grades
basis of intellectual development. as well as inclusion of basic algebra
Additionally, Piaget (1952) views concepts in primary grades, the case we see
intelligence as “adaptation to new now in Common Core State Standards
circumstances” ( p.151) and explains that in (National Governors Association Center for
any intelligent act “ the need which serves as Best Practices (NGA Center) and the
motive power not only consists in repeating , Council of Chief State School Officers
but in adapting , that is to say, in (CCSSO) (2010). Engaging in hand-on
assimilating a new situation to old schemata explorations focused on these topics
and in accommodating these schemata to reinforces students’ beliefs in the relevance
new circumstances” (Piaget, 1952, p. 182). of mathematics to real life situations thus

2013 Mathitudes 5
fostering positive math attitudes and Variability Principle, Dienes (1960)
motivation for further learning. maintains that conceptual learning is
enhanced by exposing the child to multiple,
varied physical representations on the same
Zoltan Dienes’ Theory concept. This allows the child to abstract
One of the significant pioneers who similar elements underlying the different
established a theory specifically directed embodiments. However, in the
towards understanding the learning of Mathematical Variability Principle, Dienes
mathematics is Zoltan Dienes. Dienes’ suggests that a concept dissected into
theory of learning encompasses four major constituent sub-concepts can be generalized
principles: The Dynamic Principle; the when “all possible variables [are] made to
Perceptual Variability Principle; the vary while keeping the concept intact”
Mathematical Variability Principle; and the (p.42). Finally, in the Constructivity
Constructivity Principle (Dienes, 1960). In Principle, Dienes explains the mode of
delineating the “skeleton” of his theory, thought involved in concept construction.
Dienes (1960) acknowledges the works of When discussing the structure of a task
Piaget, Bruner and Sir Frederick Bartlett appropriate for the child’s thinking, Dienes
whose ideas resonate within each (1960) identifies two levels of “logical
component of this theory. The Dynamic complexity”: constructive and analytical. He
Principle outlines three basic stages for further argues that children, when young, are
concept formation, each requiring a different involved in constructive types of thinking
kind of learning: First, free play stage which where they are actively engaged in episodes
requires free unstructured, but rather of free play. Having had the proper
purposive activities that allows open and opportunities to think constructively, Dienes
informal experimentation with the task at asserts that the child at, around 12 years of
hand; second, concept realization stage age, is then capable of more analytical mode
where the child is exposed to varying of thinking and thus well prepared to decode
experiences which are “structurally similar and analyze tasks using his initial
(isomorphic) to the concepts to be learned” constructions.
(Post, 1988, p.7). Finally, the third stage Other important implications of
represents the development of the math Dienes’ work to increase motivation and
concept and sufficiently applying it to varied invoke positive attitudes in the mathematics
contexts. Dienes (1960) calls these stages as classroom involve re-structuring the
“stages of growth necessary before a environment to include a variety of
mathematical predicate or concept becomes manipulative and learning tools,
fully operational” (p.42). He also argues encouraging group work, and reinforcing the
that learning a mathematics concept role of the teacher as a coach and facilitator.
necessitates a clear understanding of a set of
variables underlying this concept as well as Structuralism and Functionalism
other factors that are extrinsic to it and Founded by the British psychologist
which are seemingly embedded in the Edward Tichener the theory of Structuralism
experiences provided. This calls upon his capitalizes on the role of consciousness and
second and third principles, the Perceptual introspection in describing numerous
Variability Principle and the Mathematical cognitive processes and mental structures
Variability Principle. In the Perceptual including sensations, images and affections.

2013 Mathitudes 6
Structuralists contend that the sum total of representation played in changing
mental structures and their interactions performance either positively or negatively,
comprise the conscious experience. A major depending on the circumstances (Kohl &
implication of this theory is the role that Finkelstein, 2005).
immediate experiences and reflection play in While proponents of structuralism
stimulating complex perceptions and bolster capitalize on the nature and organization of
students’ positive attitudes toward math thus concepts, functionalists focus on how the
invoking learning (Carlson, 2010). mind operates in the course of problem-
Structuralism as a movement lost its solving and information processing (Byrnes,
popularity in the 1960s with the emergence 2007). Millroy (1992) defined the Piagetian
of post-structuralism, a French movement approach as “the structural developmental”
that critiqued the basic tenets of approach for it specifically concentrates on
structuralism and called for social individual cognitive development, with little
constructionism as a means to expose emphasis on social influences.
“subjugated knowledges” (Foucault, 2003).
In principle, Structuralism and Problem Solving Theory
Functionalism symbolize two end-poles of a Most of the approaches to problem
continuum vis à vis the degree of emphasis solving established during the past thirty
each paradigm merits either conceptual or years practically fall under one of the two
procedural knowledge. Rittle-Johnson, contradictory treatments: The information
Siegler, and Alibali (2001) defined processing model of human thinking
procedural knowledge as “…the ability to (Newell & Simon, 1972) and the social
execute action sequences to solve problems” practice theory (Turner, 1982). The
(p. 346). They also argued that procedural information processing model aims at
knowledge involved mainly the use of describing the general processes of problem-
previously learned step-by-step techniques solving, minimizing the role of individuals
and algorithms to solve specific types of in the problem-solving process (Putnam et
problems. Furthermore, the authors al., 1989). Schoenfeld (1983) extended by
explained that conceptual knowledge entails far the scope of traditional conception of
“… implicit or explicit understanding of the mathematical problem- solving highlighting
principles that govern a domain and of the four fundamental dimensions of good
interrelations between units of knowledge in practice: resources of mathematical
a domain” (p.346). knowledge, heuristic strategies, control over
A handful of research studies support the process of working on problems, and a
the hypothesis that forming correct problem deep understanding of the nature of
representations is one mechanism linking mathematical argumentation.
improved conceptual knowledge to Current interest in problem-solving
improved procedural knowledge (Jitendra, as a “practice” reflects a trend in which
2002; Hoffman & Spatariu, 2008). Rittle- learners are characterized as more active and
Johnson, Siegler, and Alibali (2001) defined where problem-solving is viewed as a series
problem representation as “the internal of activities (Lave et al., 1990). As a matter
depiction or re-creation of a problem in of fact, it has been widely argued that
working memory during problem-solving” emphasizing the value of teaching problem
(p. 348). Furthermore, a number of studies solving in schools as a mathematical
investigated the role that problem practice in contrast to rote procedural

2013 Mathitudes 7
approaches enables the learner to gain more forms of work organization) contrary to
in-depth understanding of mathematical cognitive psychologist focus on mental
principles underlying such practice (Nunes representations. Jonassen and Murphy
et al., 1993). The demand to integrate the (1999) argue that Activity theory presents a
learner with the surrounding environment, new perspective for analyzing learning
practice and culture is an approach that is processes and outcomes for designing
embraced by the social practice theorists. In instruction. He adds: “rather than focusing
principle, the social practice theory seeks to on knowledge states, it focuses on the
interpret the meaning of social activity in a activities in which people are engaged, the
number of environments and to discern their nature of the tools they use in those
causes. activities, the social and contextual
A close akin of the social practice relationships among the collaborators in
theory is the Activity theory. Activity theory those activities, the goals and intentions of
has been widely employed in socio-cultural those activities, and the objects or outcomes
and socio-historical research that aimed to of those activities” (p. 68).
scrutinize human activity systems (Jonassen
& Murphy, 1999). It has been extensively Nativism, Empiricism, and
used as a framework for developing Constructivism
Constructivist Learning Environments Theories of cognitive development
(CLE) and cognitive tools for learning. The are situated under three fundamental views
assumptions of activity theory resonate with related to the origin of knowledge: The
those of constructivism, situated learning, empiricist view, the nativist view, and the
distributed cognitions, case-based reasoning, constructivist view (Saxe, 1991). Byrnes
social cognition, and everyday cognition. (2007) argues that all nativists share a belief
Activity theory has its roots in the that knowledge is innate. While the
Soviet cultural-historical psychology of empiricist view favors the position that the
Vygotsky, Leont'ev (1978) and it represents environment is the source of knowledge, the
an alternative perspective to the claim that nativists advocate the need of knowledge
learning must precede activity. The most structures to organize and categorize
fundamental assumption of activity theory is experience (Saxe, 1991). The polar opposite
that the “human mind emerges and exists as of nativism is Empiricism. In this view, it is
a special component of interactions with the believed that individuals possess no a priori
environment, so activity (sensory, mental, knowledge but rather that most knowledge is
and physical) is a precursor to learning” perceived to be acquired through exposure
(p.64). to the world.
Although the learner has a central Constructivists, on the other hand,
role in defining activity, very little, if any, adopt the premise that knowledge is not
meaningful activity is accomplished inherent in the human mind nor in the
individually. Activity theory contends that environment, but is rather actively
learning and doing are inseparable, and that constructed by the individual as a result of
they are initiated by intention (Jurdak & his/her interaction with the social and
Shahin, 2001). physical environment (Millroy, 1999). As a
Activity always involves an matter of fact, constructivism derives most
ensemble of artifacts (instruments, signs, of its ideas from Piaget’s theory of cognitive
procedures, machines, methods, laws, and development.

2013 Mathitudes 8
 Partly inspired by Piagetian ideas, interaction through which adults transmit to
constructivism goes further to emphasize the the child the rich body of knowledge that
role of others in the construction process. exists in the culture.This social context
Through negotiation and communication shapes the range of potential each student
with others, constructivists claim that people has for learning. As learning progresses, the
receive continuous feedback as well as child's own language comes to serve as a
agreement concerning their personal primary tool of intellectual adaptation
constructions (Brooks & Brooks, 1993). In (Vygotsky, 1962). Therefore, Vygotsky
this respect, constructivism agrees with (1962) viewed the process of learning as
Vygotsky’s theory which asserts that mainly an internalization of a body of
cognitive functioning occurs first on the knowledge and tools of thought that first
social level, between people, and that the exist outside the child.
child afterwards internalizes this in his As a result of his intense emphasis
development (Vygotsky, 1962). on the social dimension of learning,
Vygotsky’s view inherently diverges from
Lev Vygotsky and Socio-Cultural Theory that of Piaget. Kincheloe (2004) argues that
Vygotsky was famous for Vygotsky was critical of the way Piaget
introducing the term “the zone of proximal investigated children’s cognitive abilities
development” which he defines as “the while working alone. He contends that a true
distance between the actual developmental measure of individual ability is only
level as determined by independent revealed through collective social
problem-solving and the level of potential interactions. Kincheloe (2004) also explains
development as determined through that, with his notion of learning as
problem-solving under adult guidance, or in dependent on ZPD, Vygotsky discards
collaboration with more capable peers” Piaget’s concept of development as a
(Vygotsky, 1962, p.103). Through systematic shift from one discrete stage into
scaffolding, an adult can facilitate and adjust another and highlights the role that artifacts
the environment to enhance students’ i.e., sign systems, play in developing
positive attitudes toward math and maximize cognition.
learning. In a sense ZPD represents for Researchers influenced by Vygotsky
Vygotsky the social context in which have basically emphasized the role of
learning takes place. In this respect, cultural practices in analyzing the relation
individual learning is seen as inherently between culture and cognition (Millroy,
guided by the social world through the 1992). Their investigations have generally
introduction of society’s tools and by focused on studying people’s use of math
engaging with more experienced members outside the classroom (Gay & Cole, 1967;
of society. As a socio-cultural constructivist, Jurdak & Shahin, 2001; Scribner, 1986;
Vygotsky adopts the social cognition Lave, 1988; Lave, Smith, & Butler, 1990;
learning mode, which asserts that individual Saxe, 1991, Millroy, 1992). The practice of
cognition is socially and culturally mediated math has been explored in the contexts of
(Vygotsky, 1962). Like most of the social everyday activities. Two main groups of
cognition learning theorists, Vygotsky researchers have explored the use of math in
(1962) believed that culture teaches children settings outside school: those interested in
both what to think and how to think. To “everyday cognition” or “cognition in
Vygotsky language is a primary form of practice”, where Lave is a prominent figure,

2013 Mathitudes 9
and those interested in “ethnomathematics”, four major ideas: structure of the discipline,
where D’Ambrosio (1985) is a key figure. readiness to learn which depends on rich
Both groups of researchers call for a new learning experiences and enthusiastic
conceptualization of mathematics that is teachers, intuition, and motivation. He also
rooted in nonacademic practices. The work calls for curriculum to be organized in a
of these groups focuses on three main spiral manner so that the student continually
issues: Analysis of school practice, builds upon what he/she already learned.
investigation of the transfer of school Perhaps one of the most important
knowledge to out-of-school situations, and implications of Bruner’s work is the
using the social theory of practice to significant role that different modes of
challenge conventional cognitive theory. representation play in learning mathematics.
Cramer (2003) argues that experiencing the
Jerome Bruner’s Representation Theory benefits of using multiple representations as
With the hypothesis that “any subject well as allowing possible translations among
can be taught effectively in some these different modes of representations
intellectually honest form to any child at any helps teachers become more aware of the
stage of development” (Bruner, 1960, p.47), weaknesses inherent in any curriculum and
Bruner envisioned learning as successively thus respond by incrementing it with outside
proceeding through three hierarchical stages. resources.
He held the view that experience is coded In addition to the significant role that
and processed in such a way to ensure its external representations play in students’
retrieval when needed. Such a coding active construction of mathematical
system Bruner calls representation. He concepts, many studies have investigated the
converted his ideas about modes of impact of students’ beliefs, feelings and
representation into chronologically affective representation in enhancing or
structured stages of development and hindering mathematical understanding in the
claimed that understanding in any domain classroom. Goldin (2003) calls for “a good
must involve three modes of representation: balance between the standard manipulation
enactive through habits of acting, iconic in of formal notational systems… and the
the form of pictorial images and symbolic development of other representational
through written symbols like language. “By modes: imagistic thinking, involving
enactive, I mean a mode of representing past visualization; visual imagery, pattern
events through appropriate motor response” recognition, and analogical reasoning;
(Bruner, 1964, p. 69). In this regard, he heuristic planning, involving diverse
agrees with Vygotsky’s notion of ZPD in problem solving strategies; and affective
helping children understand and master a representation” (p.283). By the same token,
concept by proceeding from physical Monk (2003) highlights the importance of
practical actions then using imagery and providing concrete, multiple embodiments
pictorial representation after which written that are meaningful to students, and further
symbols can be used. explains “the goal is not to select one or two
Not surprisingly, in his more recent representational forms for students to learn
work, Bruner expanded his theoretical and use in all situations but, rather, to teach
framework to encompass the philosophical students to adapt representations to a
and sociocultural aspects of learning. In his particular context and purpose and even to
approach to instruction, Bruner emphasized use several representations at the same time.

2013 Mathitudes 10
This goal represents a shift from capture and model complexity in the world.
representation to representing” (p.260). Such technologically-supported
environments are transforming education
Beyond Theories: Epistemological and expanding the concept of schooling
Frameworks beyond school settings. In an article
As has been noted by several entitled, Understanding Learning Systems:
theorists (Byrnes, 2007, Lesh & Doerr, Mathematics Education and Complexity
2003), perhaps there no longer exist "grand Science, Davies and Simmt (2003) describes
theories" such as Piaget's which attempt to mathematics classes as “ adaptive and self-
explain many aspects of cognition. Instead organizing complex systems” where
we have many "micro-theories" or what “learning is understood in terms of ongoing,
Lesh and Doerr (2003) calls “models” recursively elaborative adaptations through
designed to account for a “specific purposes which systems maintain their coherences
in specific situations” (p.526). within their dynamic circumstances”
An increasing number of theorists (p.138).
are developing numerous epistemological While complexity scientists agree
frameworks by combining constructs from with the views advocated by situated
several theories which may potentially learning theories and social constructivism
contribute to our understanding of how where the emphasis is placed on analyzing
mathematics is learned. The current trend in the dynamics of emerging experiences in
mathematics education research is context, however they transcend individual
converging towards adopting a models and and social constructivism in calling for a
modeling perspective for the teaching and conceptual shift away from mathematics as
learning of mathematics (Lesh & Doerr, content and toward “emergent terms”
2003). The main gist underlying this call is (Davies & Sumara, 2007). This perspective
not only to progress an agenda of research is concurrent with the view that mathematics
that builds on recommendations of is socially and culturally constructed.
constructivism, but also to include “a wealth Within the realm of complexity
of recent advances in fields of mathematics science and where the world is seen as
ranging from complexity theory to game becoming increasingly complex, the discrete
theory- where a variety of different types of distinction between teaching mathematics
systems thinking tends to be highlighted.” and teaching children collapses in favor of a
(p.555) rather nested, integrated whole whose
entities are inseparable. In this context,
Complexity Science Davies and Simmt (2003) explain: “To teach
Recent research in complexity children well, we argue, we must conceive
science has revolutionized the conduct and of our activity in terms of active
method of science by revealing new participation in the body of mathematics
perspectives and possibilities that challenge knowledge by creating the conditions for the
beliefs and ideas of contemporary learning emergence of bottom-up, locally controlled,
theories. The exponential advancement of collective learning systems” (p. 163).
innovations in digital technologies is Furthermore, the authors emphasize
pushing the boundaries of learning beyond five basic conditions that help facilitate the
existing traditional classrooms by creating creation of a classroom community: a)
learning environments that seamlessly internal diversity which, calls for respecting

2013 Mathitudes 11
and supporting individual differences in the published documents that delineated goals
classroom; b) redundancy, which shapes the and standards for mathematical content and
criteria for negotiation and participation in processes for grades K-12. In 1989, NCTM
classroom activities; c) decentralized control published Curriculum and Evaluation
where less emphasis is given to the role of Standards for School Mathematics
the teacher as expositor and calls for more expanding on the recommendations of the
thought-provoking activities; d) organized Agenda for Action publication issued in
randomness where purpose is given to each 1980 and provided a “road map” for states
activity; and e) neighbor interactions where and school districts in developing their
ideas are productively negotiated and curriculum guidelines. Principles and
provoked. Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM,
To this end, we argue that building a 2000) followed, building on the preceding
mathematical community that supports and publication and adding “underlying
nurtures individual students’ understanding principles” for school mathematics. In
of mathematical concepts is of the utmost spring 2010, The National Governors
importance. Such a classroom collective Association Center for Best Practices (NGA
represents a medium where meanings are Center) and the Council of Chief State
negotiated and shared and where instruction School Officers (CCSSO) released the
is captured in episodes of “teachable National Common Core Math Standards that
moments”. These contemporary views specifically concentrates on fundamental
present a shift of emphasis from individual shifts in content and pedagogy(National
forms of learning to a rather social, Governors Association Center for Best
collective mathematical knowledge Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of
developed as a result of a network of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)
interactions in the context of the classroom. (2010)). Teachers don't exactly feel
prepared to manage the bridging required to
Impact of Learning Theories: What access quality instructional resources and
lessons can teachers learn? teaching materials that will aid in faithful
Much of the current debate about implementation of the standards for
standards in mathematics education arose students’ academic success (Schmidt,
from opposing views about how people Houang, & Cogan, 2011). As Confrey and
learn mathematics. The questions: Should Stohl (2004) explain: “A successful
automaticity and quick recall of facts with curriculum is impossible if it does not pay
emphasis on procedural skills precede attention to the abilities and needs of
problem-solving? Or should reasoning and teachers” (p.92). What seems to be essential
constructive thinking reign in the is how teachers translate what they know
mathematics classroom even before skill about learning from these theories into
development? These questions remain practical everyday applications in their
incessantly unanswered. design and delivery of instruction. In a
Arguments initiated by national chapter entitled Beyond Constructivism: An
standards have been loud for some time. Improved Fitness Metaphor for the
Since the release of A Nation at Risk report Acquisition of Mathematical Knowledge,
by the National Center of Education Lamon (2003) explains: “classroom
Evaluation (NCEE) in 1983, many interpretations of constructivism are not
organizations, including NCTM, have necessarily headed in a useful direction and

2013 Mathitudes 12
that before the pendulum of reform sweeps Summary
too far to the right, it may be time to The 21st century is an exciting and
consider alternative, but not necessarily challenging time for mathematics teachers
competing, perspectives on the development as the opportunities to expand teaching and
of mathematical knowledge” (p. 436). With learning are becoming more and more
so many voices contributing pervasive in formal and informal education.
recommendations and standards, teachers Associated with this growth are the
are faced with overwhelming challenges in increasing number of demands and
this STEM world we live in. Interestingly expectations behooved on teachers to serve
enough, while so many considerations are as leaders enacting cutting-edge
directed toward “what” mathematics instructional practices in their classrooms.
students should learn, only a dim initiative Our world, through the use of complex
has been advanced on “how” children satellite systems, is connected with an
should learn. invisible digital network that makes todays’
The impact that theories of learning classrooms inevitably global. Students now
can have for the teacher in the mathematics learn from a multitude of resources that
classroom is far more complex than what it range from textbooks to live
seems to be. Lamon (2003) argues that the videoconferences with people
powerful recommendations set by Piaget’s geographically separated by thousands of
cognitive constructivist view, as well as miles. The world is becoming more open to
Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective of students through live, streamed videos
acculturation and negotiation can be less enabling them to see the world “as it
effective if misinterpreted and happens” without any controls. In this
overgeneralized in the mathematics climate, teachers are expected to be well-
classroom. Regardless of their graduate versed in the newest learning technologies
training or experience, we argue that and products in order to best prepare
teachers bring to their practice what might students for the global digital workforce.
be called “personal theories” of teaching and However, in the midst of increased
learning. These theories may be only partly technology, access to resources and to
conscious; however these epistemologies are professional development in today’s highly
what guide teachers’ everyday decisions diverse schools remains the fundamental
about planning, subject content, and quandary dodging opportunities for
classroom behavior. “Personal theories” of improvement in teaching and learning
teaching and learning grow out of our (Smaldino, Lowther, Russell, 2012). While
experiences as students and teachers and teachers are called upon to expand their
begin developing while we are children. We professional knowledge and growth by
develop predispositions toward certain staying informed of new technologies that
learning "styles", just as we gravitate toward have positive impact on students learning,
certain teaching styles. If we are to trace the very little effort is advanced to increase
literature on best practices for improvement teacher capability to use assistive
of teaching a useful focal point emerge technologies to facilitate student success.
which is an analysis of the degree to which With heightened tension from policy
teachers’ practice is consistent with their makers, the public as well as educational
introspection about teaching-their “personal media, teachers find themselves pressured to
theory.” deliver quality math instruction to ensure

2013 Mathitudes 13
that all students achieve academic for American Progress. Retrieved
proficiency in a STEM world (Chahine & from
King, 2012). http://www.americanprogress.org/wp
On February 17, 2009, President -content/ uploads/ issues/
Obama signed the American Recovery and 2012/03/pdf/rtt_states.pdf
Reinvestment Act (ARRA), spurring the Brooks, J.C., & Brooks, M. (1993). In
Race to the Top (RTT) initiative, which was search of understanding: The case
a way to invest in the nation's education for constructivist classrooms.
system in an effort to reform schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for
President Obama declared: “America will Supervision & Curriculum.
not succeed in the 21st century unless we do Bruner, J. (1960). Readiness for learning. In
a far better job of educating our sons and J. Bruner (Ed.) In search of a
daughters…The race starts today” (Bosser, pedagogy: The selected works of
2012, p.1). RTT focuses on more rigorous Jerome S. Bruner, (2006) Vol. 1
standards and closer evaluation of teachers (pp.47-56). London & New York:
whose performance is inextricably linked to Routledge.
students’ achievement. However, to Bruner, J. (1964). The course of cognitive
empower teachers toward better teaching growth. In J. Bruner (Ed.) In search
performance and thereby increase student of a pedagogy: The selected works of
academic progress, perhaps we need to Jerome S. Bruner, (2006) Vol. 1
provide more incentives for teachers to (pp.68-89). London & New York:
undertake the challenge of educating future Routledge.
generations. Byrnes, J. (2007). Cognitive development
In this critical educational climate, and learning in instructional
it’s reasonable to argue that what contexts. Boston, MA: Pearson.
mathematics teachers need more than ever, Carlson, N.R. (2010). Psychology: the
is sincere support and collaboration that is science of behavior. Toronto,
free from any political obligation. Instead of Canada: Pearson Canada Inc.
focusing on issues of accountability and Chahine, I.C. (in press). The impact of using
fueling efforts towards more exam–driven multiple modalities on students'
instruction, perhaps teachers need more acquisition of fractional knowledge:
support to understand how students think, to An international study in embodied
uncover cultural and social backgrounds that mathematics across semiotic
help interpret their ways of thinking, and to cultures. The Journal of
capitalize on those practices that maintain Mathematical Behavior.
equity, diversity and high quality instruction Chahine, I.C., King, H. (2012). Investigating
for all students so that more student are Lebanese teachers’ mathematical,
seeing success with math and liking it too. pedagogical and self-efficacy
profiles: A case study. Retrieved
References from
http://dx.doi.org/10.5339/nmejre.201
Bosser, U. (2012). Race to the Top: What 2.2
Have We Learned from the States So Confrey, J. & Stohl, V. (2004). On
Far? A State-by-State Evaluation of evaluating curricular effectiveness:
Race to the Top Performance. Center Judging the quality of k-12

2013 Mathitudes 14
 mathematics evaluations. adolescents’ experiences in schools
Washington, D.C: The National and in families. American
Academies Press. Psychologist, 48, 90–101.
Cramer, K. (2003). Using a translation Foucault, M. (2003). Society must be
model for curriculum development defended. (Trans. David Macey).
and classroom instruction. In R. Lesh Bertani, Mauro & Fontana,
& H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond Alessandro (Eds.). New York, NY:
Constructivism: Models and Picador.
modeling perspectives on Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat: A
mathematics problem solving, brief history of the twenty-first
learning and teaching (pp.449-463). century. New York, NY: Farrar,
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Strauss and Giroux. (Original work
Associates. published in 2005)
Csikszentmihalyi, M, & Schneider, B. Furner, J. M., & Berman, B. T. (2003).
(2000). Becoming adult: How Math anxiety: Overcoming a major
teenagers prepare for the world of obstacle to the improvement of
work. New York, NY: Basic Books. student math performance. Journal
D’Ambrosio, U. (1985). Ethnomathematics of Research on Childhood
and its place in the history and Education, 79 (3), 170-174.
pedagogy of mathematics. For the Furner, J. M., & Gonzalez-DeHass, A.
learning of mathematics, 5, 44-48. (2011). How do students’ mastery
Davies, B., & Simmt, E. (2003). and performance goals relate to math
Understanding learning systems: anxiety? Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics education and Mathematics, Science & Technology
complexity science. Journal for Education, 7(4), 227-242.
Research in Mathematics Education, Gagné, R. M. (1965). The conditions of
34(2), 137-167. learning. New York, NY: Holt,
Davies, B., & Sumara, D. (2007). Reinhart & Winston.
Complexity science and education: Gay, J., & Cole, M. (1967). The new
Re-conceptualizing the teacher’s role mathematics and an old culture: A
in learning. Interchange, 38(1), 53- study of learning among the Kpelle
67. of Liberia. New York, NY: Holt,
Dienes, Z.P. (1960). Building up Rinehart & Winston.
mathematics. London, UK: Goldin, G.A. (2003). Representation in
Hutchinson Educational LTD. school mathematics: A unifying
Drucker, P. (2010). The changing world of research perspective. In J.
the executives. Boston, MA: Harvard Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin, & D.
Business School Publishing Schifter (Eds.), A Research
Corporation. Companion to Principles and
Eccles, J., Midgley, C., Wigfield, A., Standards for School Mathematics,
Buchanan, C., Reuman, D., (pp.275-285). Reston, VA: The
Flanagan, C., et al. National Council of Teachers of
(1993). Development during Mathematics Inc.
adolescence: The impact of stage- Gonzalez, A. (2002). Parental involvement:
environment fit on young Its contribution to high school

2013 Mathitudes 15
 students’ motivation. The Clearing learning and teaching (pp.435-447).
House, 75, 132–135. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Cornell, S., Hartmann,D. ( 2007). Ethnicity Associates.
and race: Making identities in a Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice.
changing world. Thousand Oaks, Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge
CA: Pine Forge Press. University Press.
Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Lave, J., Smith, S., & Butler, M. (1990).
Motivating the academically Problem solving as an everyday
unmotivated: A critical issue for the practice. In R. Charles, & E. Silver
21st century. Review of Educational (Eds.), The teaching and assessing of
Research, 70, 151–179. mathematical problem solving (pp.
Hoffman, B., & Spatariu, A. (2008). The 61 - 81). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
influence of self-efficacy and Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity,
metacognitive prompting on math consciousness, personality.
problem solving efficiency. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Contemporary Educational Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. (2003). In what ways
Psychology, 33 (4), 875-893. does models and modeling
Illeris, K. (2004). The three dimensions of perspective move beyond
learning. Malabar, Fl.: Krieger Pub. constructivism? In R.Lesh & H.
Co. Doerr (Eds), Beyond constructivism:
Jonassen, D., & Murphy,L.(1999). Activity Models and modeling perspectives
theory as a framework for designing on mathematics problem solving,
constructivist learning environments. learning and teaching (pp.519-556).
Educational Technology of Research Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
and Development, 47(1), 61-79. Associates.
Jitendra, A. (2002). Teaching students math Millroy, W.L. (1992). An ethnographic
problem-solving through graphic study of the mathematical ideas of a
representations. Teaching group of carpenters. Journal for
Exceptional Children, 34 (4), 34-38. Research in Math Education
Jurdak, M. and Shahin, I. (2001). Problem Monographs, 5 (0883-9530).
solving activity in the workplace and Monk, S. (2003). Representation in school
the school: The case of constructing mathematics: Learning to graph and
solids. Educational Studies in graphing to learn. In J. Kilpatrick,
Mathematics Education, 47, 297- W.G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A
315. research companion to Principles
Kincheloe, J.L. (2004). Critical pedagogy. and Standards for school
New York, NY: Peter Lang mathematics, (pp. 250-261). Reston,
Publishing Inc. VA: The National Council of
Lamon, S. (2003). Beyond Constructivism: Teachers of Mathematics Inc.
An improved Fitness Metaphor for National Commission on Excellence in
the acquisition of Mathematical Education. (1983). A nation at risk:
Knowledge. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr The imperative of educational
(Eds.), Beyond constructivism: reform. Washington, Dc: Author.
Models and modeling perspectives National Council of Teachers of
on mathematics problem solving, Mathematics (2000). Principles and

2013 Mathitudes 16
 Standards for School Mathematics. iterative process. Journal of
Retrieved from Educational Psychology, 93, 346-
http://www.nctm.org/standards/conte 362.
nt.asp Saxe, G.B. (1991). Culture and cognitive
National Governors Association Center for development: Studies in
Best Practices (NGA Center) and the mathematical understanding.
Council of Chief State School Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum
Association.
Officers (CCSSO) (2010). Common
Schoenfeld, A. (1983). Beyond the purely
core state standards initiative. cognitive: Belief systems, social
Washington, DC. Authors. The cognitions, and metacognitions as
Common Core State Standards from driving forces in intellectual
http://www.corestandards.org. performance. In T. Carpenter, J.
Nunes, T., Schliemann, A.D., and Carraher, Dossey, & J. Koehler (Eds.),
D.W. (1993). Street mathematics Classics in mathematics education
and school mathematics. Boston, research (2004), (pp.110-
MA: Cambridge University Press. 133).Reston, VA: National Council
Newell, A., & Simon, H.A. (1972). Human of Teachers of Mathematics Inc.
problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, Schmidt, W., Houang, R., Cogan, L. (2011).
N.J: Prentice Hall Incorporation. Preparing future mathematics
Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence teachers. Science, 332, 1266-1267.
in children. New York, NY: Scribner, S. (1986). Thinking in action:
International University Press. Some characteristics of practical
Piaget, J. (1977). The development of thought. In R.J. Sternberg &
thought: Equilibration of cognitive R.k.Wagner (Eds.), Practical
structures. New York, NY: The intelligence nature and origins of
Viking Press. competence in the everyday world
Post, T. (1988). Some notes on the nature of (pp. 13- 30). New York, NY:
mathematics. In T. Post (Ed.), Cambridge University Press.
Teaching mathematics in Grades K- Thompson, B., & Thornton, H. (2002). The
8: Research-based methods, (pp. 1- transition from extrinsic to intrinsic
19). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. motivation in the classroom: A first
Pritchard, A. (2005). Ways of learning: year experience. Education, 122,
Learning theories and learning styles 785–792.
in the classroom. Abingdon, VA: Tuckman, B. W. (1992). Educational
David Fulton Publishers. psychology: From theory to
Putnam, R.T., Lampert, M., & Peterson, application. Orlando, Fl.: Harcourt
P.L. (1989). Alternative perspectives Brace Jovanvich.
on knowing mathematics in Turner, J. C. (1982). Toward a cognitive
elementary schools. Review of redefinition of the social group. In
Research in Education, 16, 57-149. H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social identity and
Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R.S. & Alibali, intergroup behavior (pp. 15-40).
M.W. (2001). Developing Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
conceptual understanding and University Press.
procedural skill in mathematics: An
2013 Mathitudes 17
Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and Williams, R., & Stockdale, S. (2004).
language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Classroom motivation strategies for
Press. prospective teachers. The Teacher
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J., & Rodriquez, D. Education, 39, 212–230.
(1998). The development of Yair, G. (2000). Reforming motivation:
children’s motivation in school How the structure of instruction
contexts. In P. D. Pearson & A. Iran- affects students’ learning
Nejad (Eds.), Review of research in experiences. British Educational
education (pp. 73–118). Washington, Research Journal, 26, 191–210.
DC: American Educational
Research Association.

About the Author:

Iman C. Chahine is an Assistant Professor of Mathematics Education in the Department of

Middle-Secondary Education in the College of Education at Georgia State University (GSU).
She is the director of three study abroad programs on Ethnomathematics and Indigenous
Mathematical Knowledge Systems in Morocco, South Africa, and Brazil. She received her Ph.D.
from the University of Minnesota in 2008 and her M.A. from the American University of Beirut
in 1997. Her research interests include ethnomathematics, indigenous mathematical knowledge
systems, situated cognition, and multicultural mathematics. Dr. Chahine has authored many
articles in peer- reviewed journals and published a number of book chapters related to
mathematics teaching and learning. Dr. Chahine received the GSU Instructional Innovation
Award in 2012.

2013 Mathitudes 18