Students’ Numeracy Activities in Group Discussions: A Positioning Theory Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56393/lucerna.v6i1.4299Keywords:
Numeracy, Collaborative Learning, Positioning Theory, Elementary School Students, Mathematics LearningAbstract
Unequal participation in mathematics group discussions often restricts students’ opportunities to engage in meaningful numeracy practices and develop conceptual understanding collaboratively. While previous studies have widely examined cooperative learning and classroom interaction, limited research has investigated numeracy activities through the lens of positioning theory. This study aimed to describe fifth-grade students’ numeracy activities in group discussions based on their positioning as experts, facilitators, and novices. A qualitative descriptive approach was employed involving 25 fifth-grade students from a public elementary school in Malang, Indonesia. Data were collected through numeracy tests, classroom observations, and semi-structured interviews to explore students’ interaction patterns and participation during mathematical discussions. The findings revealed that expert-positioned students tended to dominate calculation procedures, strategy selection, and answer validation, which often reduced opportunities for novice students to actively construct understanding. However, groups characterized by active facilitator roles demonstrated more balanced interaction patterns, as novice students were encouraged to explain reasoning, ask questions, and contribute ideas during discussions. These interaction dynamics created more inclusive learning environments and supported meaningful numeracy engagement among group members. The study highlights the importance of teachers designing structured collaborative discussions that distribute participation more equitably and encourage dialogic interaction to strengthen students’ numeracy learning experiences.
Downloads
References
Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001
Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024312321077
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Campbell, T. G., & Hodges, T. S. (2020). Using positioning theory to examine how students collaborate in groups in mathematics. International Journal of Educational Research, 103, Article 101632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101632
Drageset, O. G., & Ell, F. (2024). Using positioning theory to think about mathematics classroom talk. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 115, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10295-0
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z
Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3
Gal, I., Grotlüschen, A., Tout, D., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Numeracy, adult education, and vulnerable adults: A critical view of a neglected field. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52(3), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01155-9
Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015). A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st century: A survey of the state of the field. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(4), 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0708-1
Howe, C., & Abedin, M. (2013). Classroom dialogue: A systematic review across four decades of research. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(3), 325–356. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2013.786024
Jennah, M., & Subanji. (2024). Analysis of student positioning in group discussions on the material of functional relations to students’ activeness. Phenomenon: Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 14(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.21580/phen.2024.14.1.21058
Kallio, H., Pietilä, A.-M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a qualitative semi-structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031
Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802212669
Klang, N., Karlsson, N., Kilborn, W., Eriksson, P., Karlberg, M., & Holmes, K. (2021). Mathematical problem-solving through cooperative learning—The importance of peer acceptance and friendships. Frontiers in Education, 6, Article 710296. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.710296
Mahmud, M. S., & Drus, N. F. M. (2023). The use of oral questioning to improve students’ reasoning skills in primary school mathematics learning. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1126816
Mata-Pereira, J., & Ponte, J. P. da. (2017). Enhancing students’ mathematical reasoning in the classroom: Teacher actions facilitating generalization and justification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(2), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9773-4
Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: Ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920410001689689
Muslim, M., Nusantara, T., Sudirman, S., & Irawati, S. (2024). The causes of changes in student positioning in group discussions using Polya’s problem-solving and commognitive approaches. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(9). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15148
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Vol. I). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Russo, J., Bobis, J., Downton, A., & Livy, S. (2021). Primary teacher attitudes towards productive struggle in mathematics in remote learning versus classroom-based settings. Education Sciences, 11(2), Article 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020035
Ryve, A. (2011). Discourse research in mathematics education: A critical evaluation of 108 classroom studies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(2), 167–198. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.42.2.0167
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-240X(200008)23:4%3C334::AID-NUR9%3E3.0.CO;2-G
Sjöblom, M., Valero, P., & Olander, C. (2023). Teachers’ noticing to promote students’ mathematical dialogue in group work. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 26(4), 509–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09540-9
Star, J. R., & Stylianides, G. J. (2013). Procedural and conceptual knowledge: Exploring the gap between knowledge type and knowledge quality. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 13(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2013.784828
Webb, N. M. (2009). The teacher’s role in promoting collaborative dialogue in the classroom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709908X380772
