Commognitive

Anna Sfard ( 2007) explained the Commognitive as an interpretive framework used to study learning in 2 case studies. There are two assumptions in this framework. Firstly, mathematical thinking can be communicated and secondly, learning of mathematics takes place when there is modification made to the existing individual’s discourse. I share similar notions in my research interest as I am interested to understand how and why Math Talk, that is a form of communication, is related to mathematical thinking and learning in my research. Most research on discourse is used as a means for learning but in this framework, it is used as the object of learning. It provides another epistemological perspective on research on discourse that is used as an object of learning. Personally, I feel that discourse can be both a means for learning and object of learning. I see it as a means for learning when the interactions between the teacher and students provide opportunities for individual and group construction of learning to occur in a classroom. It is an object of learning because when the teacher often uses the pupils’ discourse to identify misconceptions or confirmation of learning. In this way, the teacher can alter her instruction accordingly. What are your views?