Supporting Mathematical Literacy Development: A Case Study of the Syntax of Introductory Algebra


  • Danielle Leibowitz University of Illinois at Chicago


mathematics, mathematical literacy, syntax, algebra, teaching, education


Existing research on how to develop students’ mathematical literacy skills is limited and offers few explicit recommen- dations regarding verbal and visual cues that can be used by mathematics educators to assist their students in making the connections necessary to develop their fluency in mathematical language, particularly in regard to mathematical syntax. This study examined the methods used by one introductory algebra teacher to support her ninth grade stu- dents’ mathematical literacy skills, specifically examining how she supported their understanding of the mathematical syntax of the distributive property as applied in algebra. Video footage of one class of ninth grade students from an urban high school was analyzed for the teachers’ use of discourse and gestures to support her students’ understanding. Results indicated a consistent pattern in the teachers’ use of dialog, gesture and references to the algebraic expressions. 


ACT. (2014). The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2014: National. ACT, Inc. Retrieved from research/policymakers/cccr14/pdf/CCCR14-NationalReadinessRpt.pdf

Agile Mind. (2009). Intensified Algebra. Austin, TX: The University of Texas and The University of Illinois at Chicago.

Boulton-Lewis, G. M., Cooper, T., Pillay, H., & Wilss, L. (1998). Arithmetic, pre-algebra, and algebra: a model of transition. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia Incorporated, Australia, 1, 114-120.

Buehl, D. (2011). Developing readers in the academic disciplines. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Campbell, A. E., Schlumberger, A., & Pate, L. A. (1997). Promoting reading strategies for developmental mathematics textbooks. In Selected Conference Papers, National Association for Developmental Association. Vol. 3 (pp. 4-6).

Chen, X. (2013). STEM Attrition: College Students’ Paths Into and Out of STEM Fields (NCES 2014-001). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from

Demana, F., & Leitzel, J. (1988). Establishing fundamental concepts through numerical problem solving. In A.F. Coxford & A.P. Shulte (Eds.), The ideas of algebra, K- 12 (pp. 61-69). Res-

ton, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Edwards, S. A., Maloy, R. W., & Anderson, G. (2009). Reading Coaching for Math Word Problems. Literacy Coaching Clearinghouse.

Gomez, K., Lozano, M., Rodela, K., & Mancevice, N. (2013). Designing embedded language and literacy supports for developmental mathematics teaching and learning. MathAMATYC Educator, 5(1), 43-56.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.

Programme for International Student Assessment. (2014).

PISA 2012 Results in Focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Retrieved from

Richards, E., & Terkanian, D. (2013). Monthly Labor Review: Occupational employment projections to 2022. Bureau of Labor Sta- tistics, U.S. Department of Labor. Washington, DC. Retrieved from

Schwab, K. (2014). The Global Competitiveness Report 2014-2015: Full Data Edition. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from nessReport_2014-15.pdf

Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary literacy and why does it matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 7–18.

Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity. (2014). edTPA Secondary Mathematics Assessment Handbook. Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Center of Assessment, Learning and Equity.

Thompson, D. R., & Rubenstein, R. N. (2014). Literacy in language and mathematics: more in common than you think. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(2), 105-108.






Peer-Reviewed Articles