Umeå University's logo

Understanding subject-specific texts requires interpreting representations—words, symbols, and images—in their intended senses. Many such representations are ambiguous, with meanings that shift depending on context and disciplinary conventions. This applies not only to words, for example, ‘paper’ in everyday versus academic usage, but also to symbols and images, like ‘–’, that must be interpreted in different senses depending on context. This article introduces the IRIS model (Interpreting Representations in their Intended Senses), a theoretical framework designed to capture the interpretative processes readers engage in when navigating subject language. Unlike existing models that focus primarily on vocabulary, IRIS encompasses all semiotic resources and foregrounds the discernments needed to resolve ambiguity. Analytically, it supports text studies by making explicit the interpretative demands posed by subject-specific representations. Pedagogically, it offers a tool for fostering metacognitive and metalinguistic awareness, helping learners and educators reflect on the challenges involved in interpreting subject languages.

Läsning av ämnestexter kräver inte bara kännedom om tekniska termer och symboler, utan även igenkänning av ämnesspecifik användning av vardagliga uttrycksmedel. På så vis kan till exempel en pil i matematik representera en vektor och ordet ”bråk” ges en alldeles specifik innebörd. I vårt föredrag presenterar och diskuterar vi tolkningsmodellen IRIS (The model of Interpreting Representations in their Intended Senses, Dyrvold & Ribeck Nyström, under utgivning), med vilken vi sätter fokus på vikten av att korrekt kunna disambiguera tvetydiga representationer. Eftersom IRIS inte gör skillnad på verbalspråk, symbolspråk och visuella uttrycksmedel, är den särskilt relevant för tolkning av multisemiotiska ämnestexter.

Medan andra språkmodeller (t.ex. Shanahan & Shanahan 2012; Schleppegrell 2016) huvudsakligen kategoriserar olika slags språkbruk och tillskriver dem olika domäner, pekar IRIS på tolkningsprocessen av enskilda representationer. Modellen fångar hur en läsare av en text, för varje representation, via upprepade överväganden baserade på antingen kunskap eller kontext, landar i en vardaglig, akademisk eller teknisk betydelse. För erfarna läsare är denna tolkningsprocess omedveten och automatiserad. I textanalytiska sammanhang, både språkteknologiska och manuella, krävs däremot explicita instruktioner. Vi visar och argumenterar för att IRIS är användbar som teoretisk ram i textforskning – vid alltifrån design av läsexperiment till konkret kodning och analys av empiriska data (jfr Axelsson & Jakobson 2020). 

Referenser: 

Axelsson, M. & Jakobson, B. (2020). Negotiating science – building thematic patterns of the scientific concept sound in a Swedish multilingual lower secondary classroom. Language and Education 3434(4), 291–310. 

Dyrvold, A. & Ribeck Nyström, J. (under utgivning). A subject language model of Interpreting Representations in their Intended Senses. Designs for learning.

Schleppegrell, M. J. (2016). Content-based language teaching with functional grammar in the elementary school. Language Teaching, 49(1), 116–128. 

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What Is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Does It Matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18. 

All texts are characterized by cohesive relations (see e.g., Halliday & Matthiessen,2014). In mathematical texts a facet of cohesion is networks of information between the various semiotic resources. A network is anchored by a central aspect introducing a theme relevant throughout an entire section of text. This anchoring expression isfollowed by different types of expansions of a concept, creating a cohesive network throughout the text. In this study, we focus on logical expansions as they express mathematical connections, and interpreting those are central to understandingmathematics. A logical expansion is expressed when a previously introduced centralaspect is justified, by a reason, condition, or comparison in another instance. The theoretical understanding of expansions has been developed from van Leeuwen’s (2005) work. When dynamic functions are introduced, new ways of representation are also introduced, which means that new ways to express logical expansions inmathematics may appear. On this basis, our aim is to explore how meaning is offeredto students via logical expansions in static and dynamic texts.

Mathematics text is multisemiotic and reading such texts is typically not linear due to the interrelation between the resources natural language, symbols and images (O’Halloran, 2015). The current research explores timeline analysis of student readingas a method to investigate how students connect different resources in the mathematical text, and thus which information is gained. The focus is laid on reading central aspects of mathematical concepts, expressed in different semiotic resources, and how the meaning is expanded throughout the text (e.g. see, van Leeuwen 2005). 

A complexity when reading subject specific texts is that many words, symbols and images bear meanings that are dependent on context. The mixture of subject-specific and everyday language in texts has been described in other models. While working with an empirical study on mathematics subject language (Ribeck Nyström & Dyrvold 2019), we realised that the importance of contextual interpretation of representations was insufficiently described in the existing models. In a subject as mathematics many words and symbols can be used both inan everyday and a mathematical sense (e.g. factor, divide, ! and ’ ). This existence of homonymous and polysemous representations and potential demands they put on a reader is well known for vocabulary (e.g. Nation 2001; Nerlich 2003) but less explored for thesymbolic language.

Learning a new subject means that new, specialised words and often also symbols are introduced. Furthermore, and more challenging, many words and symbols already familiar from everyday language or from another subject, are used in new senses, something that needs to be learnt. To teach about specialised representational forms is a common practice in schools, but less focus is laid on the discernments needed regarding ambiguous representations (Gibbons 2013).

For example, an exclamation mark can in one case stand for factorial and in another case indicate an imperative, sometimes even in the same sentence. Thus, ambiguous representations need to be correctly interpreted in order for the communication to work. While analysing mathematics language, this ambiguity was something we had to handle, and, more specifically, we needed a structured description of the discernments someone interpreting subject language must make. We therefore developed the Interpretation model for representations, which highlights the complexity of different senses (e.g. technical andeveryday) in the same text and puts potential ambiguities in the foreground.

The model was developed in an iterative manner, initially based on existing knowledge about language (e.g. Schleppegrell 2004, Shanahan & Shanahan 2012, Hajer & Meestringa2014), and thereafter adjusted to also capture the interpretation process for different subject languages, using mathematics as our particular case. Furthermore, a categorisation scheme representing the model was designed to communicate exactly what was needed and only that. Our intention is that the interpretation model and corresponding scheme shall be useful in teaching, in discussions about language use and to highlight characteristics of a particular subject language. 

This article explores how seven Swedish digital teaching platforms in mathematics make use of the affordances provided by various modalities and dynamic functions. A model based on social semiotics is used to analyse how dynamic functions are used, whether or not the language is technically oriented, if relational or operational processes are emphasised, and the logic in the text. The analysis focuses on how the dynamic elements in teaching materials are used and potential consequences of their use. The results reveal a tendency to predominantly allocate dynamic and interactive elements to tasks related to theoretical parts and examples, and also that the most common dynamic element, film, has substantial potential to support meaning-making in several respects. For example, a voice-over can easily contribute a personal touch, add further logic to the content, or give an explanation based on an operational process.

Computer-based assessments is becoming more and more common in mathematics education, and because the digital media entails other demands than paper-based tests, potential threats against validity must be considered. In this study we investigate how preparatory instructions and digital familiarity, may be of importance for test validity. 77 lower secondary students participated in the study and were divided into two groups that received different instructions about five different types of dynamic and/or interactive functions in digital mathematics items. One group received a verbal and visual instruction, whereas the other group also got the opportunity to try using the functions themselves. The students were monitored using eye-tracking equipment during their work with mathematics items with the five types of functions. The result revealed differences in how the students undertook the dynamic functions due to the students’ preparatory instructions. One conclusion is that students need to be very familiar with dynamic and interactive functions in tests, if validity is to be ensured. The validity also depends on the type of dynamic function used.

This study concerns mediating activities in student discussions during collaborative work with self-explanation prompts (SEPs). While the aim of most other tasks, from the students’ perspective, can be perceived as finding the correct answer, discussions supported by SEPs require a different approach, because students must engage in mathematical discussions, and explain their insights into the mathematics at hand. In this study, we explore activities that are fostered by SEPs. The analysis of the activities taking place, reveal five mediating activities to promote in teaching, but also potential hinders for the intended discussion to occur.