(Page 6 of 8) - Enculturation: The Neglected Learning Metaphor in Mathematics Education authored by Kirshner, David.

There are some circumstances such as graduate education or after school math clubs in which

acculturationist approaches seem clearly appropriate. Other circumstances, such as that described
in the above anecdote, clearly are unsuitable. Those mathematics seniors needed an
enculturationist pedagogical approach in which the forms of participation were interactively
constituted, rather than just demonstrated or modeled. (I believe mathematics has a more
pronounced problem than other subject areas in the lack of disciplinary enculturation generally
achieved by undergraduates.) However, the extant pedagogical literature concerned with
students= enculturation (e.g., articles cited herein) includes, without distinction, reference to both
enculturationist and acculturationist techniques. This practice flirts with a variety of potential
problems that will need to be addressed before enculturationist learning goals can achieve the
status they deserve in education:

Are acculturationist and enculturationist pedagogies inherently in tension with one
another? Does the personal self-identification of some students with the teacher as a
representative of the reference culture subvert the work of establishing a classroom
microculture that serves all students; or can a skillful teacher use the acculturationist
gains of the few to support and strengthen the classroom microculture for the many?

Are there social chasms that emerge in a classroom in which the teacher reciprocally
supports the identity construction of a few students? How do such chasms interact with
divisions of race, class, and gender already present in the classroom? More generally, are
there ethical considerations that arise in general education when a teacher places
expectations of a particular cultural identification on students? If so, are such concerns
outweighed by the importance for all students to have opportunities for identification with
disciplinary cultures?

Are (teacher centered) acculturationist practices in which the teacher embodies cultural
dispositions used to substitute for the delicate and difficult (student centered) work of
nurturing those dispositions within the evolving classroom microculture? (The analogy,
here, is to lecture, understood within crossdisciplinarity as a teacher centered approach to
students= conceptual development that relies on students= metacognitive sophistication
to bring dissonant understandings into productive contact with one another. Otherwise,
the student centered constructivist teacher must take on the responsibility for
orchestrating cognitive dissonances through carefully contrived task experiences.)

The enculturationist/acculturationist distinction introduced here previously is unnoted in the

literature. As a result, the possibility for a pure enculturationist pedagogy, and the potential
problems of blending enculturation with acculturation pedagogies, have not been addressed. I
count it a strength of the crossdisciplinary approach that unifocal attention to the learning
metaphors brings forth such distinctions, with all of their attendant possibilities and problems.

References

Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Situative versus cognitive perspectives:

Form versus substance. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 18-21.

Arcavi, A. (1994). Symbol sense: Informal sense-making in formal mathematics. For the

Learning of Mathematics, 14(3), 24-35.

Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1996) Psychological theory and the design of innovative

learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R.
Glaser (Eds.), Innovation in learning (pp. 289-326). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.

Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.