Article published In:
Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language EducationVol. 3:1 (2015) ► pp.127–147
Vol. 3:1 (2015) ► pp.127–147
The influence of the math classroom context on students’ academic English production
The case study summarized in this article relies primarily on activity theory (e.g., Engestrom, 1987), and incorporates complexity, accuracy, and fluency analyses (see Ellis & Barkhuizen, 2005) to describe real-time oral language production by four focal English language learners (ELLs) in a sheltered high school math classroom in the U.S. Further, it describes how that language use was influenced by the classroom context. Findings indicate that ELLs produced very little complex, elaborated academic language because there were a variety of contextual factors that interacted to minimize students’ need to use it. Insights gained from an activity theory perspective highlight the influence of three unresolved tensions in the classroom activity system, namely: low language expectations in the curriculum, the teacher’s lack of familiarity with L2 instructional strategies, and the students’ lack of engagement with “best” practices that included use of hands-on material. Greater administrator support and transparency about desired academic language outcomes could enhance both the teachers’ language development skills and student outcomes.
References (45)
Abedi, J. (2007). Summary and recommendations. In J. Abedi (Ed.), English language proficiency assessment in the nation: Current status and future practice (pp. 121–132). Davis, CA: University of California, Davis.
Abedi, J., & Herman, J. (2010). Assessing English language learners’ opportunity to learn mathematics: Issues and limitations. Teachers College Record, 112(3), 723–746.
Adler, J. (1997). A participatory-inquiry approach and the mediation of mathematical knowledge in a multilingual classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33(3), 235–258. 
Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., & Amabisca, A. (2010). Defining opportunity to learn for English language learners: Linguistic and cultural dimensions of ELLs’ instructional contexts. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 15(3), 259–278.
Bailey, A., & Butler, F. (2009). Ethical considerations in the assessment of the language and content knowledge of U. S. school-age English learners. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(2), 177–193.
Bailey, A, & Heritage, M. (2008). Formative assessment for literacy, grades K-6: Building reading and academic language skills across the curriculum [E-reader version]. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Bigelow, M. (2010). The policies and politics of educating refugee adolescents. Language Learning, 60 (Supplement 1), 119–145.
Chamot, A. (1996). The cognitive academic language learning approach: A model for linguistically diverse classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 259–273.
Cook, H., Wilmes, C., Boals, T., & Santos, M. (2008). Issues in the development of Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs) for WIDA consortium states (WCER Working Paper No. 2008–2). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research. Retrieved from [URL]
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.
Cramer, K., Behr, M., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (2009). Rational number project: Initial fraction ideas. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Retrieved from [URL]
Crookes, G. (1989). Grassroots action to improve ESL programs. University of Hawai’i Working Papers in ESL, 821, 45–61.
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14(2), 40–52.
DeCapua, A., Smathers, W., & Tang, L. (2009). Meeting the needs of students with limited or interrupted schooling: A guide for educators. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Duff, P. (1986). Another look at interlanguage talk: Taking task to task. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition (pp. 147–181). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D.J. (2010). Making content comprehensible for secondary English learners: The SIOP model. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133–156.
Foster, P., Tonkyn, A., & Wigglesworth, G. (2000). Measuring spoken language: A unit for all reasons. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 354–375.
Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective literacy and English language instruction for English learners in the elementary grades: A practice guide (NCEE 2007–4011). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education. Retrieved from [URL]
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1999). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Hansen-Thomas, H. (2009). English language learners and math: Discourse, participation, and community in reform-oriented, middle school mathematics classes. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Hess, K., & Kearns, J. (2010). An introduction to the learning progressions frameworks designed for use with the common core state standards in mathematics K-12. Retrieved from [URL]
Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1010–1038.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 3–31). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Ketterlin-Geller, L., Chard, D., & Fien, H. (2008). Making connections in mathematics: Conceptual mathematics intervention for low-performing students. Remedial and Special Education, 29(1), 33–45.
Liu, K. (2014). An activity theory perspective on academic language use by English language learners in a high school math classroom. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.
Moschkovich, J. (1999). Supporting the participation of English language learners in mathematical discussions. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(1), 11–19.
. (2011). Supporting mathematical reasoning and sense making for English learners. In M. Struchens & J. Quander (Eds.), Focus in high school mathematics: Fostering reasoning and sense making for all students (pp. 17–35). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2009). Executive summary — Focus in high school mathematics: Reasoning and sense-making. Retrieved from [URL]
New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2008). The English language learning progressions: Years 9–13. Retrieved from [URL]
Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework (Technical Report 2003–1). Framework. Irvine, CA: The University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute. Retrieved from [URL]
Schleppegrell, M.J. (2001). Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12(4), 431–459.
Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated discourse: The nexus of practice. New York: Routledge.
Setati, M., & Adler, J. (2000). Between languages and discourses: Language practices in primary multilingual mathematics classrooms in South Africa. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43(3), 243–269.
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93–120.
Wang, J., & Goldschmidt, P. (1999). Opportunity to learn, language proficiency, and immigrant status effects on mathematics achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(2), 102–111.
West, M. (1953). A general service list of English words with semantic frequencies and a supplementary word list for the writing of popular science and technology. London: Longman, Green.
Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14(1), 85–106.
Wood, L., & Kroger, R. (2000). Doing discourse analysis: Methods for studying action in talk and text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2010). Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning environments. Boston, MA: Springer US.
Zwiers, J. (2007). Teacher practices and perspectives for developing academic language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 93–116.
. (2008). Building academic language: Essential practices for content classrooms, grades 5–12. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Barwell, Richard
2015. Commentary on Berger Dissertation Summary. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 3:2 ► pp. 314 ff. 
Berger, Angela
2015. Conceptualizing the interaction between language and mathematics. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 3:2 ► pp. 285 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.