Cited by 248Mathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesInnovative Education and Learning Practices

Disciplined Perception: Learning to See in Technoscience

Stevens, Reed, Hall, Rogers·1998·Talking Mathematics in School

Abstract

It is futile to study perception “in itself.” It must be treated as a “phase of action” in relation to the motor and intellectual activity of the individual. … An object only affects behavior in so far as it has meaning, and this only arises from its functional relations to other objects, be they spatial or temporal relations, or relations of causality or purposiveness, etc. The problem of meaning, therefore, ultimately has priority over that of form. Albert Michotte (1954) Let the use teach you the meaning. Ludwig Wittgenstein (1953) Introduction This chapter presents an approach to understanding how people learn and use their bodies to participate in the cultural practices of technoscience. Our analyses are organized around two detailed cases of embodied disciplinary knowledge drawn from two naturally occurring settings. The first case is a tutoring interaction involving an adult tutor and an adolescent student working together on school mathematics tasks involving the Cartesian coordinate system. The second case involves two civil engineers redesigning a roadway plan for a housing project using a more complex “coordinate system.” These case studies describe the development of what we call “disciplined perception.” This volume attests to the growing focus on talk in research on mathematics learning. As conversation and discourse analysts have argued over the last twenty years, “talk-in-interaction” (Schegloff, 1992) is a primary site for activity that makes, reproduces, and…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/cbo9780511571251.007

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There is no one simple set of knowledge that can be called disciplinary knowledge.

    “Indeed, Stevens and colleagues (in press) argue that different forms of knowledge count as knowledge depending on the situation, the temporal context, and the people involved, suggesting that there is no one simple set of knowledge that can be called disciplinary knowledge, thus making rote transfer of knowledge virtually impossible (cf.Stevens & Hall, 1998).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Stevens, R., & Hall, R.
Venue
Talking Mathematics in School
Published
1998-10-13
Pages
107-150
OpenAlex
W2194925426
Cited by
248
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 14
FWCI
9.98
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
Keywords
embodied knowledge, technoscience, mathematics learning, Cartesian coordinates, civil engineering, talk-in-interaction, disciplinary knowledge

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review