Mathematics is a core subject in school that all students must learn. It involves working with numbers in hundreds of different ways. Some easy such as 2+2, and others so difficult that only old mathematicians know how to solve them. But math is more than just using numbers, right? If it involves reading, understanding, background knowledge, real-world experiences, higher-order thinking, etc. how can teachers expect students to learn math right off the bat? How can math be transformed to be more relatable to students so they want to learn it? “Using transactional reading strategies to support sense-making and discussion in mathematics classrooms: An exploratory study,” written by Borasi, Raffaella; Siegel, Marjorie; Fonzi, Judith; Smith, and Constance F. digs into how reading can correspond to learning mathematics, and how they could possibly be linked together.
The article mentioned above makes the claim that, “In recent years, the mathematics education community has begun to converge on an image of mathematics classrooms that bears little resemblance to the technique- and transmission-oriented classrooms familiar to most students” (Using transactional reading 1998). If classrooms do not represent the same style in which they are used to learning mathematics information, will it be more difficult for them to learn than it already was before? Paying attention to the wording may also raise some questions, i.e. how recent are the years in which the mathematics community begun making the changes, and how exactly did they come up with the tools in which they were moving away from familiar classrooms? The article states, “The call now is for curricula that focus on developing reasoning, communication, and problem-solving abilities (NCTM, 1989) as well as on promoting understanding of the “big ideas” within mathematics (Steen, 1990) and building realistic conceptions of mathematics as a discipline (Borasi, 1992),” providing reasoning as to why teachers began making these changes. The text also states, “Research on students’ learning and beliefs has also led some mathematics educators to articulate a new image of mathematics classrooms as communities of practice in which students join with peers to actively explore the concepts and techniques introduced so they can personally make sense of them (e.g., Schoenfeld, 1992).” Going off the evidence and claims this article has made about mathematics, it can easily be related back to the skills that are associated with disciplinary literacy.
Disciplinary literacy is the way in which students read different forms of text within the different subjects. Students grow their skills throughout their educational programs in order to read all texts at a high level. But how can mathematics text and English text possibly be connected? The article states, “we believe that expanding the kinds of texts read in mathematics classrooms beyond textbooks and word problems is important in order to expose mathematics students to issues that are becoming more significant as the goals for school mathematics are redefined”. Moving away from just the standard readings that involve mathematics may enhance students reading skills when it comes to harder problems or other class subjects. In the video that we watched in for a previous class, we see a math teacher having students read true or false questions allowed and then explaining them. This technique is useful for students to hear themselves reading the problem, as well as working through their explanations. Students are able to work with numbers in all different ways, but learning multiple ways to discuss them is when their learning can really take flight.
mnc2020 
I think there is a robust educational theory behind your conclusion that “learning multiple ways to discuss [numbers] is when their learning can really take flight.” I’ll have to double check on the course blog, but I’m not sure when the article you’re addressing was written– typically educational researchers provide this information in their in-text citations (https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/in_text_citations_author_authors.html).
Anyway, I’m wondering what kinds of texts you or the authors you’re citing are imagining when you all think of “moving away from just the standard readings that involve mathematics.” It is interesting to think that math shows up in so many other areas— gathering statistics on a recent poll, making the case that a certain teaching practice led to student growth, the argument that red meat is the leading cause of heart disease or that red met is NOT the leading cause of heart disease– these all invoke mathematical processes to support their arguments. Furthermore I think there are also mathematical processes like determining which bus route to take to avoid rush hour traffic, or trying to write a coding script to automatically count a certain kind of word in a set of documents that also could be relevant.
LikeLike