Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

‘Boring’ or ‘Fun’: Pre-Service Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Epistemological and Positional Framing of Mathematics, Its Learning and Teaching

Jennifer Stefania Herrera-Lozano 1 * ,
Mourat Tchoshanov 1,
Carlos Vargas 1,
Jacqueline Sandoval 1
1 The University of Texas at El Paso* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 9, Issue SI, June 2026, pp. 171-200
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 133 DOWNLOADS: 58 Publication date: 05 Aug 2026
ABSTRACT
Pre-service mathematics teachers' conceptions of mathematics and their positioning as future teachers provide insight into how they frame mathematics teaching and learning. This study examines the epistemological and positional framing of 19 pre-service middle school mathematics teachers enrolled in a mathematics methods course at a university situated in a U.S.-Mexico border region. Drawing on Hammer and Elby's (2002, 2003) epistemological resources framework and Harré and van Langenhove's (1999) positioning theory, we analyzed participants' written responses to four purposefully designed prompts that probed their beliefs about the nature of mathematics and their instructional strategies for making mathematics accessible and engaging. Thematic analysis, conducted by three raters (percentage agreement 75%), generated themes for epistemological framing (e.g., teacher and teaching, student experience, learning process, and content characteristics) and positional framing (e. g., instructional strategies, real-life relevance, manipulatives and visuals, technology integration and gamification, and collaboration and social learning). Findings reveal that the large majority of participants (12/19) rejected a deficit framing of mathematics as inherently difficult and boring, while simultaneously resisting the opposite extreme of reducing mathematics to mere fun and simplicity. Rather, participants consistently sought to integrate engagement, conceptual rigor, and real-world relevance - reflecting a nuanced epistemological stance that treats mathematical challenge and student motivation as complementary rather than competing demands. These findings carry significant implications for mathematics teacher education, underscoring the need to develop future teachers' explicit, integrated awareness of both what mathematics is and how it is enacted in the classroom.
KEYWORDS
epistemological framing, middle school mathematics, positional framing, pre-service mathematics teachers, teacher education.
CITATION (APA)
Herrera-Lozano, J. S., Tchoshanov, M., Vargas, C., & Sandoval, J. (2026). ‘Boring’ or ‘Fun’: Pre-Service Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Epistemological and Positional Framing of Mathematics, Its Learning and Teaching. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 9(SI), 171-200. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.517SI
REFERENCES
  1. Aguirre, J. M., Mayfield-Ingram, K., & Martin, D. B. (2013). The impact of identity in K–8 mathematics learning and teaching: Rethinking equity-based practices. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  2. Alvidrez, M., Louie, N., & Tchoshanov, M. (2024). From mistakes, we learn? Mathematics teachers’ epistemological and positional framing of mistakes. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09553-4
  3. Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students' potential through creative math, inspiring messages, and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass.
  4. Delahunty, T. & Kimbell, R. (2021). (Re)framing a philosophical and epistemological framework for teaching and learning in STEM: Emerging pedagogies for complexity. British Educational Research Journal, 47, 742-769. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3706
  5. Domínguez, H. (2011). Using what matters to students in bilingual mathematics problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76(3), 305–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9284-z
  6. Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2010). Epistemological resources and framing: A cognitive framework for helping teachers interpret and respond to their students’ epistemologies. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 409–434). Cambridge University Press.
  7. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399–483. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1
  8. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
  9. Gresalfi, M., & Cobb, P. (2006). Cultivating students’ discipline-specific dispositions as a critical goal for pedagogy and equity. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 1(1), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15544818ped0101_8
  10. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169–190). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  11. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_3
  12. Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 89–120). Information Age Publishing.
  13. Harré, R. & van Langenhove, L. (Eds.). (1999). Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action. Blackwell.
  14. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Otten, S. (2011). Mapping mathematics in classroom discourse. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(5), 451–485. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.42.5.0451
  15. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Wagner, D. (2007). A framework for uncovering the way a textbook may position the mathematics learner. For The Learning of Mathematics, 27(2), 8-14.
  16. Herbel-Eisenmann, B., & Wagner, D. (2010). Appraising lexical bundles in mathematics classroom discourse: Obligation and choice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9240-y
  17. Hill, H., Ball, D., & Schilling, S. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372-400. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.39.4.0372
  18. Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088
  19. Kaur, N. & Dasgupta, C. (2024). Investigating the interplay of epistemological and positional framing during collaborative uncertainty management. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 33(1), 80-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2024.2312163
  20. Kurup, P. M., Nethsinghe, R., Li, X., Cherian, J., & Yang, Y. (2023). Building global teaching capacity among pre-service teachers: Epistemological and positional framing in an internationally paired, authentic practicum. Journal of Studies in International Education, 27(2), 336-357.
  21. Patterson, Z. & Ding, L. (2025). Epistemic framing analysis of secondary students during instruction on quantum physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 21. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.21.010116
  22. Russ, R. S. & Luna, M. J. (2013). Inferring teacher epistemological framing from local patterns in teacher noticing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 284 - 314. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21063
  23. Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications.
  24. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). Macmillan.
  25. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge University Press.
  26. Shim, S. Y., & Kim, H. B. (2018). Framing negotiation: Dynamics of epistemological and positional framing in small groups during scientific modeling. Science Education, 102(1), 128–152. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21306
  27. Smith, E. (2024). A teacher’s positioning of a multilingual learner in the first month of the academic year. Research in Mathematics Education, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2022.2133004
  28. Tannen, D. (1993). Framing in discourse. Oxford University Press.
  29. Wagner, D., & Herbel-Eisenmann, B. (2009). Re-mythologizing mathematics through attention to classroom positioning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9178-5
  30. Wendell, K. B., Swenson, J. E. S. & Dalvi, T. S. (2019). Epistemological framing and novice elementary teachers' approaches to learning and teaching engineering design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(7), 956-982. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21541
  31. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458–477. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.27.4.0458
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.