Education Sciences: Against The Odds: Insights From A Statistician With Dyscalculia

education
sciences
Article
Against the Odds: Insights from a Statistician
with Dyscalculia
Katherine E. Lewis 1, * and Dylan M. Lynn 2
1 College of Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
2 Independent Researcher, Seattle, WA 98195, USA; dylanlynn.edu@gmail.com
* Correspondence: kelewis2@uw.edu; Tel.: +1-206-221-4738

Received: 28 February 2018; Accepted: 19 April 2018; Published: 26 April 2018
Abstract: Students with dyscalculia are typically thought of by both researchers and educators as
having deficits. The deficit language permeates studies of dyscalculia as well as assessments and
documentation of students in schools. In this paper, we offer an alternative to the dominant narrative.
We understand disabilities, and dyscalculia specifically, as resulting from cognitive differences—not
deficits—which lead to issues of access. We provide a case study of Dylan (second author),
an individual with dyscalculia who decided to major in statistics at University of California, Berkeley
and become a statistician. Although she experienced significant issues of access—both in the standard
tools used to do mathematics, and in navigating the structures at the university—she developed
systems to enable her to compensate. She collaborated in this research enterprise in order to share
with researchers, teachers, parents, and students her experiences with dyscalculia and how she was
able to succeed in higher level mathematics. Informed by previous empirical work, we collected
video recordings of Dylan’s deliberate efforts to share insights and strategies with another student
with dyscalculia. In this work, Dylan challenges dominant and problematic myths about ability
and mathematics.
Keywords: dyscalculia; learning disability; mathematics; access; accommodations; compensation;

myths; case study; disability studies; emancipatory research
1. Introduction
“We don’t say people with dyslexia will never learn to read, so we shouldn’t say that people with
dyscalculia can never learn to do math.”
(Dylan; second author)
In this paper we draw upon Dylan’s experience having both dyscalculia and majoring in statistics
at University of California, Berkeley before going on to work as a data analyst for 4 years. Not only
is it assumed that a student like Dylan would not be able to major in mathematics, but she was told
by countless well-meaning advisors, teachers, and professors that she should switch majors. We use
Dylan’s case to challenge the myth that individuals with dyscalculia cannot be successful in higher
level mathematics. Although Dylan did experience significant issues of access over the course of her
educational career, Dylan developed a complex repository of tools and compensatory strategies that
enabled her to address these issues of access and succeed [1,2].
Approximately 6% of all students have dyscalculia (also referred to as a mathematics learning
disability) [3,4]. Students with dyscalculia have a neurological difference in how their brains process
numerical information [5]. For example, students with dyscalculia have been found to be slower and
more error prone than their peers when processing symbolic (e.g., 5) and non-symbolic (e.g., *****)
representations of number [6]. These kinds of number processing issues can lead to significant
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63; doi:10.3390/educsci8020063 www.mdpi.com/journal/education

Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 2 of 19
difficulties learning and doing mathematics [7]. Although research on dyscalculia has identified several
ways in which students with dyscalculia have different patterns of difficulties than their peers [8–10],
we identify several issues with the traditional approaches used to study this disability. First, research
on dyscalculia has predominantly framed this disability in terms of deficits [11]. These deficits are
often defined and quantified by comparisons between students with and without dyscalculia on
measures of speed and accuracy (e.g., [12]). This deficit perspective presumes that the disability is
due to an internal and biologically-based deficiency, which implies that students with dyscalculia
cannot succeed in mathematics. Second, research on dyscalculia has almost exclusively focused on
mathematics concepts introduced during early elementary school (e.g., arithmetic) [13]. The lack of
studies documenting dyscalculia with older students in advanced mathematics could be attributed to a
deficit-based presumption that students must master the basics before they can engage in any higher-level
mathematics. Therefore, much attention has been focused on the difficulty that students with dyscalculia
experience with memorizing and retrieving basic number combinations (e.g., 4 + 5 = 9) often to the
exclusion of all else [14].
This deficit-oriented perspective on dyscalculia has had ramifications for how researchers and
educators understand this disability and has contributed to specific myths about dyscalculia and
mathematics. In this paper, we address and push back on the following myths:
Myths about dyscalculia:
• Dyscalculia results from inherent cognitive deficits within the individual;

• Students with dyscalculia cannot learn or do higher-level mathematics.
Myths about mathematics:
• Students must master the “basics” to succeed in higher-level mathematics;

• Speed and efficiency are important to succeed in mathematics.
We argue that these myths permeate beliefs that researchers, teachers, and parents have about
students with dyscalculia and have in many circumstances been codified in policies and practices
governing students (e.g., individualized education programs, curriculum-based measurements). In this
paper, we offer an alternative vantage point to the prevailing deficit notions about disability, and allow
Dylan—a statistician with dyscalculia—to provide insight into her experiences. She serves as an
existence proof countering these common myths about ability and mathematics.
In this section, we describe how our unique theoretical and methodological approach enables
us to disrupt and push back against the dominant myths perpetuated by traditional research on
dyscalculia. First, we reconceptualize dyscalculia as a cognitive difference, rather than a cognitive
deficit. Second, we use an emancipatory research approach [15], in which the individuals with
disabilities are deeply involved in all aspects of the research process.
1.1. Understanding Dyscalculia as Difference

In our work, we reject the deficit model, which assumes that disability is an internal and inherent
characteristic of the student (see Figure 1) and we reframe dyscalculia as a cognitive difference [16].
This difference does matter; not all tools, spaces, and contexts are equally accessible to all people.
Standard tools, which have developed over human history to be optimized for individuals with typical
development, may not be accessible to individuals with disabilities [16]. For example, just as printed
text may not be accessible to a blind individual, mathematical symbols, manipulatives, and pictures
may not be accessible to an individual with dyscalculia because of a difference in how they process
numerical information. This reframing of disability in terms of difference identifies the “problem” as
the inaccessibility of material tools rather than attributing this to some internal characteristic of the
student (see Figure 1).
However, just because the canonical tools are not accessible does not mean that the individual cannot
access the content through other means. When an individual’s physical, neurological, or perceptual
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 3 of 19
differences render a standard tool inaccessible, there are two possible options. First, alternative 3tools
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW of 19
that are accessible can be developed and used, as is the case with Braille. Second, an individual can
compensatecan
individual [16]. We understand
compensate compensation
[16]. We to be an individual’s
understand compensation to be an deliberate
individual’saction leveraging
deliberate action
alternative resources to gain access to an otherwise inaccessible space, content, or context. For
leveraging alternative resources to gain access to an otherwise inaccessible space, content, or context. For example,
some blind
example, individuals
some echolocateecholocate
blind individuals (i.e., use sound likesound
(i.e., use radar)like
to navigate
radar) tophysical
navigatespaces [17].
physical The same
spaces [17].
goal same
The can begoal
achieved,
can be but the means
achieved, but theof achieving
means of that goal are
achieving different.
that goal are This focus This
different. on difference
focus on
and compensation
difference shifts ourshifts
and compensation attention to tryingtototrying
our attention understanding what students
to understanding do, rather
what students than
do, rather
documenting
than and quantifying
documenting whatwhat
and quantifying they cannot do. Therefore,
they cannot in ourinanalysis,
do. Therefore, we focus
our analysis, on theontools
we focus the
that Dylan used and how she compensated to gain access to mathematics.
tools that Dylan used and how she compensated to gain access to mathematics.
Figure 1. Illustration contrasting a deficit view and a difference view of dyscalculia.

Figure 1. Illustration contrasting a deficit view and a difference view of dyscalculia.
1.2. Emancipatory Research Approach

1.2. Emancipatory Research Approach
Another unique characteristic of this research is its collaborative nature. Disability advocacy
Another unique characteristic of this research is its collaborative nature. Disability advocacy
groups argue that individuals with disabilities should be included throughout the research process
groups argue that individuals with disabilities should be included throughout the research process
rather than subjected to non-disabled researchers’ agendas [15]. This kind of collaboration between
rather than subjected to non-disabled researchers’ agendas [15]. This kind of collaboration between
researcher and participant is referred to as emancipatory research, because it inverts the traditional
researcher and participant is referred to as emancipatory research, because it inverts the traditional
power dynamic and places the authority in the hands of the individuals with disabilities [15,18]. An
power dynamic and places the authority in the hands of the individuals with disabilities [15,18].
emancipatory approach enables individuals with disabilities to push back on oppressive structures
An emancipatory approach enables individuals with disabilities to push back on oppressive structures
that limit access because the individuals with disabilities have agency over the research questions,
that limit access because the individuals with disabilities have agency over the research questions, data
data collection, analysis, and dissemination [19,20]. In writing this manuscript, we attempt to fulfill
collection, analysis, and dissemination [19,20]. In writing this manuscript, we attempt to fulfill the goals
the goals of emancipatory research [19]. First, we achieve Dylan’s primary goal to share her
of emancipatory research [19]. First, we achieve Dylan’s primary goal to share her knowledge with
knowledge with teachers, parents, and students. Second, we critique the systemic and structural
teachers, parents, and students. Second, we critique the systemic and structural barriers that Dylan
barriers that Dylan encountered as a student and propose alternatives to increase access for students
encountered as a student and propose alternatives to increase access for students with dyscalculia.
with dyscalculia.
1.3. Role of the Researchers
1.3. Role of the Researchers
Dylan initiated this research collaboration by contacting Katie (first author) when she was a senior
Dylan
statistics initiated
major. Dylanthis
hadresearch collaboration
experienced bypersistent,
significant, contactingand Katie (first author)
pervasive issues withwhen she was a
mathematics
senior
but was determined to major in statistics because she found it interesting. She had struggled with
statistics major. Dylan had experienced significant, persistent, and pervasive issues with
mathematics but was determined to major in statistics because she found it
math throughout her life, but when she got to college she started failing her classes. “I did so wellinteresting. She had
struggled with math throughout her life, but when she got to college she started
in all my other courses, but there was this one area, math, that I had a hard time with. [My advisor] failing her classes.
“I did so well
suggested thatinI all
getmy other courses,
screened but there was
by an educational this one area,
psychologist”. Themath, thatrevealed
testing I had a hard time with.
that Dylan had
[My advisor]
unusual suggested
difficulties; that I get screened
she explained, “I can dobyaddition
an educational psychologist”.
and subtraction The testing
but it takes me a lot revealed that
longer than
Dylan hadAnd
it should. unusualthat’sdifficulties;
where the she explained,
educational “I can do addition
psychologist said it’sand subtraction
highly unusual,but youitprobably
takes mehave
a lot
longer than especially
dyscalculia, it should. forAnd that’s where
someone who’s the educational
taken psychologist
all these hard math classes,saidbut
it’sit’s
highly
takingunusual, you
you so long
probably have dyscalculia, especially for someone who’s taken all these hard math classes, but it’s
taking you so long to do a lot of these basic arithmetic things”. Dylan received accommodations for
having a disability that specifically impacted her ability to do mathematics (see [2] for more
information). After becoming frustrated with the lack of accommodations and supports, she
connected with the students’ disabilities group on campus and learned about Katie’s research.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 4 of 19
to do a lot of these basic arithmetic things”. Dylan received accommodations for having a disability
that specifically impacted her ability to do mathematics (see [2] for more information). After becoming
frustrated with the lack of accommodations and supports, she connected with the students’ disabilities
group on campus and learned about Katie’s research.
Dylan contacted Katie to try to learn about strategies that students with dyscalculia can use for
higher level mathematics. Katie explained that unfortunately she was unable to provide Dylan any
direct assistance because she had never taken the upper division mathematics courses that Dylan was
enrolled in. In this first meeting, Katie shared a little about her research and her own experiences
having been diagnosed with a language-based learning disability (i.e., dyslexia). Katie informed Dylan
that there was not a documented case of an individual with dyscalculia who majored in mathematics.
Together, Dylan and Katie decided to document both the difficulties that Dylan experienced as well as
how she had learned to compensate. Dylan’s goal in engaging in this research was wide dissemination
of her hard-fought knowledge so that others would not have to go through what she did. She wanted
to share with researchers, teachers, parents and students what she had learned and how she had
succeeded in mathematics despite the issues of access she encountered. We have published empirical
results of this research collected during Dylan’s senior year elsewhere [1,2]. As in the case with
emancipatory research, Dylan was involved in the design, analysis, and writing of this empirical
work (see [2] for details). In this manuscript, we report on video data collected this year in which
Dylan shared her strategies with the hope that it would be beneficial to others. In this research,
we acknowledge Dylan’s status as an expert on dyscalculia who is ideally positioned to help others.
2. Methods
In order to highlight the issues of access Dylan experienced and the ways she learned how to
compensate, we used video recordings of Dylan sharing her experiences in two contexts. First, Dylan
met with another college student with dyscalculia (“Cindy”). During this session, Dylan shared her
experiences and provided advice and recommendations to help Cindy address her own difficulties.
Second, Katie interviewed Dylan about her experiences learning and doing mathematics. During the
interview, Dylan solved several mathematics problems of varying difficulty, discussed her general
approaches for compensating, and described the tools and systems that she put in place that enabled
her to succeed. The interview provided an opportunity for Dylan to discuss her use of particular tools
(e.g., graph paper, pencils) that were not available during the session with Cindy. These two data
sources provide complementary data and are integrated in the findings. Both video recordings were
content logged and selectively transcribed. All video data was collected in accordance with University
of Washington’s Institutional Review Board policies and procedures.
The video records were analyzed with iterative passes through the data and were coded for
(a) Dylan’s reported difficulties or issues accessing the mathematics; (b) the structural barriers she
faced as a statistics student with dyscalculia; (c) compensatory strategies Dylan used to address issues
of access; and (d) recommendations for tools and instructional approaches that may be beneficial for
students with dyscalculia. In this coding effort, we drew upon the operational definitions we produced
in our previous analyses of Dylan’s compensatory processes [1,2]. The coding scheme for this was
developed by both authors and a research assistant, and then all data were systematically coded by
at least two coders (see [1,2] for more details). The compensatory strategies identified and presented
here align with those identified in our previous work [1,2]. Member checks were naturally embedded
within the process as Dylan collected the data and collaborated with Katie in analysis and writing.
To ensure that Dylan’s voice is central in these findings, we use quotes taken from the video recorded
sessions. In some cases, we have removed some irrelevant talk to make the quotes easier to read.
Although we have co-written this paper, we use the third person throughout the paper for clarity.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 5 of 19
3. Results
We begin by presenting a description of the difficulties Dylan encountered as a student and an
overview of the physical tools and compensatory strategies she used to make mathematics accessible.
Second, we provide a detailed illustration of each of the compensatory strategies. As we discuss each
strategy, we highlight Dylan’s issues of access, the specific ways she compensated, and the additional
demands implementing each compensatory strategy placed on her. Third, we report on the structural
barriers that Dylan encountered as she completed her degree in statistics. Finally, we present Dylan’s
recommendations for educators working with students who may have dyscalculia.
3.1. Overview of Dylan’s Issues of Access, Tools, and Compensatory Strategies

Dylan experienced significant, persistent, and pervasive issues with mathematics. Dylan explained
that she had difficulty inverting numbers (e.g., writing 18 as 81), distinguishing mathematical symbols,
understanding dense mathematical notation (e.g., fractions), and understanding the magnitude of numbers
and how operations might affect numerical values. To address these difficulties, Dylan developed a
repository of tools and compensatory strategies that enabled her to access mathematics. Dylan used a
collection of physical tools that she explained was essential for her to do mathematics, which included
• Graph paper (4 squares per inch) to help her align and space her notation;
• Mechanical pencils to ensure a consistently sized lead thickness;
• A retractable eraser to enable her to erase precisely; and
• Colored pens to color code her notes and help her track various symbols and elements.
She used these tools along with the following compensatory strategies when learning and
doing mathematics:
1. Rewriting in words—she translated mathematical symbols into words (e.g., 3 as “three”);
2. Creating a dictionary—she created an internally consistent and differentiated way of writing
each mathematical symbol so it had only one meaning and was not perceptually confused with
other symbols;
3. Rewriting for consistency—she rewrote problems in a consistent form to make use of space to
maintain clarity about her solution process;
4. Consistent solution process—she developed and used consistent solution processes to solve
particular kinds of problems; and
5. Grounding the abstract—she grounded her understanding of values and mathematics concepts
in real-world examples.
We illustrate each of these compensatory strategies below using examples and excerpts drawn
from the video recordings. Note that during the sessions with Cindy, although they discussed tool use,
Dylan used felt-tipped markers for visibility within the video and did not have access to her standard
complement of tools.
3.1.1. Rewriting in Words

Dylan had difficulty understanding and tracking the meaning of mathematical symbols.
She explained one of her strategies to make sense of notation was to rewrite the mathematical symbols
in words. This helped her understand the meaning of the symbols and helped her solve problems.
She gave an example of how she would write out a problem like 5 + 3 = to help her make sense of the
symbols, and how this was a strategy she still used with higher-level mathematics such as calculus.
Dylan: “I am stronger with language, so this is a thing that I did when I was a kid. And then
I actually started doing it—it came up more in my higher level math classes. If I have like five
plus three equals eight [writes 5 + 3 = 8; see Figure 2], I actually do really well with language.
[writes out “five plus three equals eight”]”.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 6 of 19
By translating the symbols into words, she would more readily be able to connect the symbols
to their underlying meaning. She explained that mathematical notation was a condensed notational
form of writing words; “math is shorthand for this [points to “five plus three equals eight”]”. It was this
“shorthand” for quantities that Dylan found hard to access, which was why she routinely translated
these kinds of symbols into words. When explaining this approach to Cindy, she went on to give an
example for calculus and how she would regularly translate function notation (i.e., f(x)) into words to
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 19
make it more understandable.
Dylan:
Educ. “This
Sci. 2018, 8, x is
FORcalculus, but you
PEER REVIEW can see it illustrated with this notation [writes f(x) = x +6 of 4x193;
Dylan: “This is calculus, but you can see it illustrated with this notation [writes f(x) = x + 4x3 ;
see Figure 2] this notation, the way people say this is “f of x” which is also terrible. It’s the
see Figure
Dylan: 2] thisisnotation,
“This calculus, buttheyou
waycanpeople say this iswith
see it illustrated “f ofthis
x”notation
which is also f(x)
[writes terrible.
= x + 4xIt’s
3; the
function of x equals this [as writing “function of x = x + 4x33; see Figure 2]. This little notation
function of x 2]
see Figure equals this [as writing
this notation, the way“function
people sayofthis
x =isx “f
+ 4x ; see
of x” Figure
which 2]. This
is also little
terrible. It’snotation
the
here [points to f(x)] would throw me off really badly in3 my classes, because f times x? No,
herefunction
[points of
to xf(x)]
equals
wouldthis throw
[as writing “function
me off really ofbadly
x = x in
+ 4x
my; see Figurebecause
classes, 2]. This flittle
timesnotation
x? No, it’s
it’s here
a notation
[points that is would
basically applying this
reallyfunction into the variable x. I would
times sometimes
a notation that to
is f(x)]
basically throw
applying methis
offfunction badly
to the my classes,
variable x. because
I wouldf sometimes x? No,write
writeit’s out
a something
notation that islike this [writes
basically applyingbracket
this underneath
function to the “function
variable ofI x”]
x. wouldright underneath
sometimes
out something like this [writes bracket underneath “function of x”] right underneath whatever it
whateverout it was and again, this [writes
is really verbose, [but] it“function
might be helpful.”
waswrite
and again, something like this
this is really bracket
verbose, [but] underneath
it might be helpful.” of x”] right underneath
whatever it was and again, this is really verbose, [but] it might be helpful.”
Figure
Figure 2. Dylan’s
2. Dylan’s examples
examples of rewriting
of rewriting mathematical
mathematical symbols
symbols withwith words,
words, which
which helped
helped her
her translate
Figure 2.
translateDylan’s
and makeexamples
sense of of
the rewriting
meaning
and make sense of the meaning of the notation. of mathematical
the notation. symbols with words, which helped her
translate and make sense of the meaning of the notation.
Dylan noted that she often used this kind of translation in her notes to help her decode the
Dylan noted
meaning that she and
of the symbols, often used this
described it askind of translation
her creation in her
of metadata fornotes to helpFor
the notation. her decode the
example,
Dylan noted that she often used this kind of translation in her notes to help her decode the
meaning of the
she would symbols,
translate the and described
notation P(A|B)it as “probability
her creation of metadata forFigure
the notation. For example,
meaning of the symbols, and described itinto
as her creationofofA metadata
given B” (see 3). This rewriting
for the notation. For example,
she would translate the notation P(A|B) into “probability of Aorgiven B” (see Figure 3). This rewriting
she into
wouldwords was essential
translate when she
the notation was learning
P(A|B) new concepts
into “probability new notation.
of A given B” (see Figure 3). This rewriting
into words was essential when she was learning new concepts or new notation.
into words was essential when she was learning new concepts or new notation.
Figure 3. Example of Dylan’s translation from mathematical symbols, P(A|B), into words.
This translation of symbols into words took Dylan extra time both when writing notes and when
Figure 3. Example of Dylan’s translation from mathematical symbols, P(A|B), into words.
Figure
solving 3. Example
problems. Becauseof this
Dylan’s
kindtranslation fromwas
of translation mathematical symbols,
not available in her P(A|B),
classes orinto words. she
textbooks,
paid tutors to provide this kind of support. She explained that “I would force tutors to give me the
English words for the symbols, which was always funny because these are grad students who haven’t
solving problems. Because this kind of translation was not available in her classes or textbooks, she
thought about this stuff in years. ‘How would you use this in a sentence? I haven’t thought about it
paidthat
tutors to provide
way’”. The kindsthis kind of that
of supports support.
DylanShe explained
needed were notthat “I would
something thatforce tutorswere
the tutors to give me the
skilled
English words for the symbols, which was always funny because these are grad students
at providing. Although this compensatory strategy provided her with a way of understanding the who haven’t
thought about this
mathematical stuff init years.
symbols, placed‘How would
additional you use
demands thisher
upon in requiring
a sentence?thatI haven’t
she spend thought about it
more time
thatand
way’”. Thethan
money kinds
herof supports
peers to havethat Dylan
access needed were not something that the tutors were skilled
to mathematics.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 7 of 19
solving problems. Because this kind of translation was not available in her classes or textbooks,
she paid tutors to provide this kind of support. She explained that “I would force tutors to give me the
English words for the symbols, which was always funny because these are grad students who haven’t
thought about this stuff in years. ‘How would you use this in a sentence? I haven’t thought about it
that way’”. The kinds of supports that Dylan needed were not something that the tutors were skilled
at providing. Although this compensatory strategy provided her with a way of understanding the
mathematical symbols, it placed additional demands upon her requiring that she spend more time
and money than her peers to have access to mathematics.
3.1.2. Creating a Dictionary

Not only did Dylan experience difficulty understanding and decoding symbols, but she experienced
issues of access when mathematical symbols were perceptually similar. She perceived several numerals to
be perceptually similar and explained that, “I have a hard time with ones and sevens; and threes and eights”,
she also had difficulty differentiating her fours from her nines and her sixes from her fives. To address these
issues, Dylan created her own system of distinct and consistent ways of writing each symbol, which she
referred to as her dictionary. “That is one of the techniques I rely upon really heavily: [I’m] super consistent
in the ways I write things and the notation I decide on. Trying my best to make it really distinct, so my ones
don’t look like my sevens and my threes don’t look like my eights”. The perceived perceptual similarity
was not limited to the 10 numeral symbols. For example, she explained her difficulties differentiating the
symbol x from upper case X and the plus sign.
Dylan: “There is the lower-case x and the upper-case x, and God forbid you rotate it and it
looks like a plus. Coming up with some distinct way so that I know what my variable means
and then the language that I associate with the way that looks right.”
One of her primary goals was to “make [mathematical symbols] very distinct from one another”,
so that when she saw the symbol she was able to tell what it referred to. “I [have] come up with a really
consistent form of notation, so it’s unambiguous”. Because she had difficulty in differentiating both
number symbols and other mathematical notation, she explained: “I was dogmatic about how clean
and crisp I wrote my notation to differentiate it as much as possible”. This was one of the reasons she
relied so heavily upon mechanical pencils that could provide lines of uniform weight and a retractable
eraser to erase precisely.
Dylan also had difficulty if one symbol was used for two different meanings (e.g., x standing for
both the multiplication operation and an unknown). She explained how sometimes “one symbol has
multiple meanings. And math is really lazy and they tend to reuse [notation] to mean different kinds
of things”. She explained that she would differentiate the different meanings by writing each symbol
in distinct ways depending upon the context.
Dylan: “So I would be taking two math courses in the same semester and one would use an
“r” for one meaning and one would use an “r” for another meaning. I would have to do a
lower-case r for that class and an upper-case r for this class.”
Although this often enabled her to differentiate the meanings of the same symbols, “I had
to sometimes go back and reassess”. One of the challenges of maintaining this system was that
as she moved through higher-level mathematics courses she would need to revise her dictionary.
She explained: “Then, the next semester I would take a different class and all of a sudden the r would
have a third meaning and I would have to reassess my dictionary”. Although this dictionary enabled
her to access and understand the meaning of symbols consistently, it was challenging to maintain,
particularly as the mathematics notation got more complex and symbols were reused for new purposes.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 8 of 19
3.1.3. Rewriting with Consistency

Dylan also experienced issues of access with the density of mathematical symbols. She often
would rewrite problems to space her notation out in a uniform way. For example, when given a
problem in a book or on a test, she would rewrite the problem in her own handwriting often using
graph paper, Educ.
in which
Sci. 2018, each
8, x FORsymbol occupied one square of the graph paper (see Figure 4).8 of 19
PEER REVIEW
Figure 4. Problem written by Katie and rewritten by Dylan on graph paper using one box for each
Figure 4. Problem written by Katie and rewritten by Dylan on graph paper using one box for each symbol.
symbol.
Dylan: “Another thing I do is, although I could have started working off your problem, I
Dylan: “Another thing I do is, although I could have started working off your problem, I
won’t. I’ll rewrite it in my own handwriting. One, because I’m familiar with my
won’t. I’ll Figure
rewrite it in my
4. Problem
handwriting. Andown
written byhandwriting.
two, Katie and
because forcesOne,
it rewritten because
mebytoDylan I’m
on the
rewrite graph familiar
paper
problem usingwith
one
again, Imy
sobox forhandwriting.
know each
what
symbol.
And two, because it forces me to rewrite the problem again, so I know what I’m solving.”
I’m solving.”
Dylan’s
Dylan: rewriting
“Another thingwould
I do enable
is,to her toI use
although couldherhave
dictionary
started ofworking
consistent off and
your distinct
problem, symbols
I to
Dylan’s rewriting would enable her use her dictionary of consistent and distinct symbols to rewrite
rewrite
won’t.theI’llproblems
rewrite into
it inanmyaccessible format. “When
own handwriting. One,youbecause
see the symbol,
I’m familiarthe first
with thing
myI do is,
the problems depending
into an accessible
handwriting.uponAnd format.
whattwo, “When
typebecause
of problem you see
I’m doing,
it forces
the
me to Irewrite
symbol,
rewritethe the
it inproblem first
my handwriting thing
again, so that
I do is,
I have
I know
depending
identified upon
what
what type of problem
as I’m I’m doing,
unambiguous.”
solving.” WhenI there
rewritewere it multiple
in my handwriting
canonical or acceptablethat I have waysidentified as unambiguous.”
to write a problem, she
When there were would rewrite the
multiple problemor
canonical using the form that
acceptable ways sheto preferred.
write a “I come up with
problem, she whatever
would operator
rewrite theI’mproblem
Dylan’s rewriting would enable her to use her dictionary of consistent and distinct symbols to
most comfortable with and before I even attempt a math problem, I rewrite it.” She gave examples of
using the form thatthe
rewrite sheproblems
preferred.into“I ancome up with
accessible whatever
format. “When you operatorsee theI’m most the
symbol, comfortable
first thing Iwithdo is,and before
how she handled both multiplication and division, which had multiple notations that were not all
depending
I even attempt a math upon what type
problem, I of problem
rewrite it.” I’m
She doing,
gave I rewrite
examples it in my of handwriting
how she that I have
handled identified
both multiplication
equally accessible for her. For example, multiplication can be represented with an x, a dot (i.e., •), or
and division,as unambiguous.”
which When there
had multiple were multiple
notations that canonical
were notorallacceptable
equally ways to write afor
accessible problem,
her. she example,
with parentheses. Although she had used a dot for multiplication throughout high school, sheFor
found
would rewrite the problem using the form that she preferred. “I come up with whatever operator I’m
multiplication that
canthisbewas problematicwith
represented in heran advanced
x, a dotmathematics
(i.e., •), orcourses. “It becomes problematic
with parentheses. Althoughinshe higher
had used
most comfortable with and before I even attempt a math problem, I rewrite it.” She gave examples of
level math beyond this, in linear algebra it means something else.” She also avoided using the dot as
a dot for multiplication
how she handled throughout high school,
both multiplication she found
and division, which had thatmultiple
this was problematic
notations that were innot
heralladvanced
multiplication because it could be confused with a decimal: “I’m also careful with it because of
mathematics equally accessible
courses. for her. For
“It floats
becomes example, multiplication
problematic in higher can be
level represented
math beyond with
this,anin x, linear
a dot (i.e., •), or
decimals—it up and down [gestures up and down with pointer finger].” Because the algebra
dot had ait means
with parentheses. Although she had used a dot for multiplication throughout high school, she found
something else.” Shemeaning
different also avoided
in linearusing
algebrathe anddot as multiplication
because the dot could be mistakenbecausefor it acould
decimal bepoint,
confused
Dylan with a
that this was problematic in her advanced mathematics courses. “It becomes problematic in higher
would rewrite any problem that used the dot symbol floatsfor multiplication. She gave an example of the
decimal: “I’mlevel math beyond this, in linear algebra it means something else.” She also avoided using the dot asdown with
also careful with it because of decimals—it up and down [gestures up and
problem: 4x • 3 = 5.
pointer finger].” Becausebecause
multiplication the dotithad coulda different
be confused meaning in linear
with a decimal: algebra
“I’m and because
also careful with it becausethe dot of could be
Dylan:floats
mistaken fordecimals—it
a decimal “So let’s
point,up say we
and
Dylan have
down
would the problem
[gestures
rewrite and4xdown
up any timeswith
problem 3 equals
pointer
that 5 [writes
finger].”
used • 3 =symbol
the4xdot
Because 5; see
theFigure
dot 5]. a
for had
multiplication.
If meaning
I saw thisinwritten
linear down,
algebraI and
will actually the rewrite it likebe this [writes 4x(3)
for a =decimal
5; see Figure
point,5],Dylan
so
She gave andifferent
example of the problem: 4x • 3 =because5. dot could mistaken
parentheses
would rewrite are used that
any problem as multiplication. I come up
used the dot symbol for with a really consistent
multiplication. She gaveform of notation,
an example of the
so 4x
problem: it’s• unambiguous.”
3 = 5.
Dylan: “So let’s say we have the problem 4x times 3 equals 5 [writes 4x • 3 = 5; see Figure 5].
Dylan:
If I saw this “So let’s
written say weI have
down, willthe problemrewrite
actually 4x times it
3 equals 5 [writes
like this 4x • 34x(3)
[writes = 5; see=Figure
5; see5].Figure 5],
If I saw this written down, I will actually rewrite it like this [writes 4x(3) = 5; see Figure 5], so
so parentheses are used as multiplication. I come up with a really consistent form of notation,
parentheses are used as multiplication. I come up with a really consistent form of notation,
so it’s unambiguous.”
so it’s unambiguous.”
Figure 5. Dylan’s illustration of how she would rewrite the problem 4x • 3 = 5 as 4x(3) = 5 to remove
the problematic dot symbol for multiplication.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 9 of 19
Similarly, notation for division was also problematic; Dylan found the standard division symbol
inaccessible. For the problem 6 ÷ 3 = she explained, “This is terrible [pointing to the division sign in 6 ÷ 3 =]
is it the 3Educ.
divided by
Sci. 2018, 8, xthe
FOR6PEER
or the 6 divided by the 3?” She also found the perceptual similarity
REVIEW 9 of 19 of the long
division sign and the square root sign to be problematic, so she tended to rewrite division problems using
Similarly, notation for division was also problematic; Dylan found the standard division symbol
the fraction bar symbol.
inaccessible. For the problem 6 3 = she explained, “This is terrible [pointing to the division sign in 6
3 =] is it the 3 divided by the 6 or the 6 divided by the 3?” She also found the perceptual similarity
Dylan: “Division [writes ÷, see Figure 6] is typically taught like this to younger students.
of the long division sign and the square root sign to be problematic, so she tended to rewrite division
I despise
problems this symbol,
using because
the fraction I’m not sure what is acting on what. Long division is a little
bar symbol.
easier [writes long division
Dylan: “Division [writessign toFigure
, see right 6]ofis÷typically
; see Figure
taught6]; however,
like long students.
this to younger division, I once you
start doing square roots [writes square root sign below long division sign;
despise this symbol, because I’m not sure what is acting on what. Long division is a little see Figure 6], so I
easier [writes long division sign to right of ; see Figure
actually use the fraction symbol [draws fraction bar; see Figure 6].” 6]; however, long division, once you
start doing square roots [writes square root sign below long division sign; see Figure 6], so I
actually
Although use the problems
rewriting fraction symbol [draws
to use fraction
space bar;her
and see Figure 6].”
preferred notation enabled Dylan to access
the meaningAlthough rewriting problems
of the mathematics to use space
symbols, sheand her preferred notation
acknowledged enabledmany
that—like Dylan to
ofaccess the
her compensatory
meaning of the mathematics symbols, she acknowledged that—like many of her compensatory
strategies—it took more time and effort. For her, the tradeoff was worth it. She explained: “rewriting
strategies—it took more time and effort. For her, the tradeoff was worth it. She explained: “rewriting is
is another technique
another that
technique thatI Isuggest for
suggest for kids
kids that that addstime,
adds more more buttime, butmyincreases
increases my odds of accuracy.”
odds of accuracy.”
Figure 6. Dylan’s written work when discussing various division notation options and her preferences
Dylan’smodified
Figure 6.(digitally writtentowork when discussing various division notation options and her preferences
remove subsequent marks).
(digitally modified to remove subsequent marks).
3.1.4. Consistent Solution Process
3.1.4. Consistent Solution

In addition Process
to her difficulties with notation, Dylan described herself as having poor number
sense [2]. She often had difficulty understanding the magnitude of quantities (e.g., factions, negative
In addition
numbers) andto her
howdifficulties
operations mightwith notation,
affect Dylan
their values. described
To address herself
this, Dylan asupon
relied having
a set poor
of number
sense [2].processes
She oftenthathad
helpeddifficulty
her solveunderstanding the magnitude
problems. The consistency of quantities
of these processes enabled(e.g.,
her tofactions,
know negative
numbers) and trust
and how her operations
answer, evenmight
if she had difficulty
affect understanding
their values. the quantities
To address involved.
this, Dylan In our
relied upon a set of
previous work [2] we identified six consistent processes that Dylan used across a range of
processesmathematics
that helped her solve problems. The consistency of these processes enabled her to know and
topics. The consistent processes identified in our prior analysis were
trust her answer, even if she had difficulty understanding the quantities involved. In our previous
1. Converting all fractions to a common base or language (i.e., denominator);
work [2] 2.we Showing
identified six consistent
all steps processes
of her solution process; that Dylan used across a range of mathematics topics.
The consistent processes
3. Pulling out like identified in our prior
terms (e.g., negatives analysis were
or variables);
4. Distributing first to get rid of parentheses to simplify the problem;
1. Converting
5. Usingallherfractions to a for
“abcd” method common base ordivision
solving fraction language (i.e.,(i.e.,
problems denominator);
); and
2. Showing all steps of her solution process;
6. Solving problems as inverse operations.
3. Pulling out like terms (e.g., negatives or variables);
We illustrate Dylan’s explanation of two of these consistent processes (converting all fractions to
4. Distributing first
a common base andto get rid
showing all of parentheses
steps) and how thesetoconsistent
simplifyprocesses
the problem;
enabled her to make sense of
a
and solve problems. Then, we present an exemplar problem Dylan solved in the b interview
ad that
5. Using her “abcd” method for solving fraction division problems (i.e., c = bc ); and
illustrated many of her consistent processes in one problem. d
6. SolvingDylan had difficulty
problems as inverse conceptualizing
operations. the relative magnitude of fractions, which made
comparisons and operations with fractions challenging. “It’s a very dense notation, when you think
We about the concept
illustrate it’s trying
Dylan’s to portray.”
explanation of She
twooften referred
of these to fractionsprocesses
consistent with different denominators
(converting all fractions to
as speaking different languages or having different bases. To address her difficulty in conceptualizing
a commonfractional
base and showing all steps) and how these consistent processes enabled
magnitude, she used a consistent process of converting all fractions to a common
her to make sense
of and solve problems. Then, we present an exemplar problem Dylan solved in the interview that
illustrated many of her consistent processes in one problem.
Dylan had difficulty conceptualizing the relative magnitude of fractions, which made comparisons
and operations with fractions challenging. “It’s a very dense notation, when you think about the
concept it’s trying to portray.” She often referred to fractions with different denominators as speaking
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 10 of 19
different languages or having different bases. To address her difficulty in conceptualizing fractional
magnitude, she used a consistent process of converting all fractions to a common denominator by
multiplying the numerator and denominator by the denominator of the other fraction. For example,
to compareEduc.
theSci.
fractions 1/3 and 1/4, she explained that she would first determine a common
2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
base
or language.
denominator by multiplying the numerator and denominator by the denominator of the other
Dylan:fraction.
“So this For
is example,
the classic to compare
thing, thatthe fractions
I see these 1/3 two
and 1/4, she explained
numbers and they thataren’t
she would
in the first
same
determine a common base or language.
language. I would immediately try to get these into the same common denominator so I can
Dylan: “Sothem.
try to understand this is the
And classic thing,
that’s that I see
where these my
I have two numbers and they aren’t
cross multiplying in the that
thing same goes on
language. I would immediately try to get these into the same common denominator so I can
[draws arrow between the denominator of each fraction and the numerator and denominator of the
try to understand them. And that’s where I have my cross multiplying thing that goes on
other fraction; seearrow
[draws Figure 7], one
between of those little
the denominator of eachrules.
fractionSoandthree times four,
the numerator to get them
and denominator of the into the
same base other
is 12.fraction;
So now I will7],
see Figure have
one twelve on the
of those little bottom
rules. for
So three both
times of to
four, them into/12
[writes
get them the and /12],
and to get same
this base is 12.3So
4 times is now
12, 4I will
timeshave twelve
1 is on the4].
4 [writes bottom
Andfor3 both
timesof 4them [writes
is 12 and/12 and
3 times 1 is 3
/12], and to get this 4 times 3 is 12, 4 times 1 is 4 [writes 4]. And 3 times 4 is 12 and 3 times 1
[writes 3]. And now I can actually compare these two numbers [writes >]. The three is smaller
is 3 [writes 3]. And now I can actually compare these two numbers [writes >]. The three is
and now I smaller
can rewrite
and now them
I can [writes 1/3 >[writes
rewrite them 1/4].”1/3 > 1/4].”
Figure 7. Dylan’s written work for her comparison of 1/3 and 1/4.
Figure 7. Dylan’s written work for her comparison of 1/3 and 1/4.
In order to compare fractions, Dylan would convert them to a common denominator so that she
could operate on the
In order to compare values asDylan
fractions, if they were
wouldwhole numbers
convert (e.g., to
them comparing
a common 3 anddenominator
4 and ignoring the so that she
denominator). After she determined the relationship, she then rewrote the fractions in the simplified
could operate on the values as if they were whole numbers (e.g., comparing 3 and
and original form (1/3 and 1/4). Her use of the “language” analogy helped her understand how to
4 and ignoring the
denominator). After
operate sheconceptualize
on and determined the relationship,
factions, she then
and she sometimes rewrote
also used the fractions
this language analogy to inrefer
the to
simplified
and original form
like (1/3 and
and unlike terms1/4). Herinuse
(as is seen of the
the next “language” analogy helped her understand how to
example).
operate on and The second consistent
conceptualize processand
factions, involved
she Dylan showingalso
sometimes every step of
used herlanguage
this solution process. Dylanto refer to
analogy
sometimes had difficulty losing terms or symbols, and tracing a problem from one step to the next if
like and unlike terms (as is seen in the next example).
multiple operations were performed simultaneously. To address these issues, as she solved problems,
The second consistent
she represented process
each step involved
of her solution Dylan
process. This showing
often involvedevery
more step
writingofbut
her solution
it enabled her process.
Dylan sometimes had difficulty losing terms or symbols, and tracing a problem from one step to
to understand the transformation from one step to the next and enabled her to catch her mistakes
more easily.
the next if multiple She gave anwere
operations example of how shesimultaneously.
performed would write out every step whenthese
To address talking through
issues, asher
she solved
solution to the problem 12x + 5 − 3 = 6.
problems, she represented each step of her solution process. This often involved more writing but
Dylan: “I’m a big proponent of writing out every single step including anything that is
it enabled her to understand the transformation from one step to the next and enabled her to catch
intermediate even if it seems redundant. If I have [writes 12x + 5 - 3 = 6; see Figure 8] and I
her mistakes more easily.
wanted Sheforgave
to solve anisexample
x. This actually a of how
good one.she would
I’ll just write out
go through every
it with stepofwhen talking
my steps
through her solution to thedoproblem
how I would 12xsee
it, so you can 5 −way
+ the 3 =I 6.
think through problems. So, the first thing that
I immediately see is that I want to start combining things that are similar. I use the word
Dylan: “I’m a biga proponent
language of [points
lot so these guys writing to 5 out
and 3]every single
speak in step
the same including
language, anything
because they are that is
intermediate even if it seems redundant. If I have [writes 12x + 5 - 3 = 6; see Figure 8] and I
wanted to solve for x. This is actually a good one. I’ll just go through it with my steps of
how I would do it, so you can see the way I think through problems. So, the first thing that
I immediately see is that I want to start combining things that are similar. I use the word
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 11 of 19
language a lot so these guys [points to 5 and 3] speak in the same language, because they are
just numbers, this one [points to 12x] has a variable attached to it so it’s speaking in a different
language, there is one that is just a number [points to 6]. So, I’ll start with the language that
these guys are speaking. So, I’ll rewrite twelve x [writes 12x] because I’m not going to do
anything to justit.numbers,
Plus [writes +] I’m
this one notto doing
[points 12x] has anything
a variableto. Um, five
attached to it minus three, now
so it’s speaking in a I’ve got
2 [writes 2different
=]. I’m language,
not doing there is one that
anything to isthe number6].
just6 a[writes [points
Now to I6].want
So, I’lltostart
get with
rid ofthethis two
because it language
speaks the that same
these guys are speaking.
language as theSo,6. I’ll
Sorewrite
I needtwelve
to, andx [writes
this 12x] because
is where my I’mcolors
not come
going to do anything to it. Plus [writes +] I’m not doing anything to. Um, five minus three,
in. So, I’mnowgoing to minus 2 from this side [writes −2] and minus 2 from this side [writes -2].
I’ve got 2 [writes 2 =]. I’m not doing anything to the 6 [writes 6]. Now I want to get rid
And sometimesof this twoI’ll because
rewriteit this
speaksoutthe[writes 12x + 2as−the2 6.
same language 6−
= So 2]. So,
I need now
to, and thisI’m leaving
is where my the 12x
alone [writescolors come
12x], in. So,
two I’m going
minus two to is minus 2 from this
zero [writes +0].side [writes
This −2] and
is one minus
of the 2 from
steps this or may
I may
side [writes -2]. And sometimes I’ll rewrite this out [writes 12x + 2 − 2 = 6 − 2]. So, now I’m
not do depending upon how much I have going on. Six minus two is 4. [writes 4]. Now I
leaving the 12x alone [writes 12x], two minus two is zero [writes +0]. This is one of the steps
can get ridI mayof my or may not0,
plus dosince it doesn’t
depending upon how domuch
anything 12x =
I have going on.4Six minus 12x
[writes two is=4.4]. I’ve got to
[writes
get this 124].somehow
Now I can get rid of my plus 0, since it doesn’t do anything 12x = 4 [writes 12x = 4]. I’ve by 12
over here, so I can isolate this x by itself. I know I can divide
[writes /12]gotand to get this 12by
divide somehow
12 [writesover here,
/12].so12I can isolate this
divided by 12x byisitself.
1. OneI know I can divide
x equals by
four-twelfths
[writes 1x =124/12].
[writes /12] and divide by 12 [writes /12]. 12 divided by 12 is 1. One x equals four-twelfths
This [pointing to 1] is redundant because 1 times x is just x. [writes x = 4/12]
[writes 1x = 4/12]. This [pointing to 1] is redundant because 1 times x is just x. [writes x = 4/12]
I can go further
I can goand simplify
further that,that,
and simplify butbutI don’t
I don’tthink
think I’ll dothat
I’ll do that right
right now.”now.”
Figure 8. Dylan’s written solution for 12x + 5 − 3 = 6, illustrating how she shows all steps of her solution
Figure 8. Dylan’s written solution for 12x + 5 − 3 = 6, illustrating how she shows all steps of her solution process.
process.
As Dylan solved the problem she was careful to copy over each part of the problem that
As Dylan solved
remained the problem
unchanged and madeshesure
wastocareful to copy
only do one overeach
operation each part
step, ofrewriting
often the problem that remained
the equation
unchangedsoand made sure
the operations weretoembedded
only do within
one operation
it rather thaneach step,
notated on often rewriting
a separate line. Dylantheillustrated
equation so the
operations in this embedded
were example how within
she useditcolor to help
rather thanhernotated
differentiate
on abetween
separate theline.
equation
Dylan(blue) and the
illustrated in this
operations applied to the equation (green). Her deliberate effort to show all steps helped her track
example how she used color to help her differentiate between the equation (blue) and the operations
her progress through the problems and avoid mistakes.
applied to the equation
To provide(green).
an example Her deliberate
of how Dylan’s effort to show
consistent allmight
processes stepsmakehelped her track
a problem her progress
lengthier,
through the problems and avoid mistakes.
she explained how she would solve the problem 3(x + 2) = ½(3 − x). Although most statistics majors
might solve
To provide this in four
an example oforhow
fewerDylan’s
steps (e.g.,consistent
6(x + 2) = 3 −processes
x; 6x + 12 = might
3 − x; 7xmake
= −9; x a= −9/7), Dylanlengthier,
problem
solved this problem in 14 steps. Her written work (with annotations) illustrates how she used several
she explained how she would solve the problem 3(x + 2) = 1/2(3 − x). Although most statistics majors
of her consistent processes as she solved the problem (see Figure 9).
might solve this in four or fewer steps (e.g., 6(x + 2) = 3 − x; 6x + 12 = 3 − x; 7x = −9; x = −9/7), Dylan
solved this problem in 14 steps. Her written work (with annotations) illustrates how she used several
of her consistent processes as she solved the problem (see Figure 9).
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 12 of 19
In this problem, Dylan made sure to show every step of the solution process, and this included
copying the original problem Katie had written into her own handwriting and copying the current
equation verbatim In thiswhen
problem,moving to a second
Dylan made sheetevery
sure to show of paper.
step of Both theseprocess,
the solution reproductions were considered
and this included
part of hercopying the original
step-by-step problem
process Katie had
because they written
wereinto her own for
necessary handwriting and copying
her to make sense the current
of the symbols and
equation verbatim when moving to a second sheet of paper. Both these reproductions were
to help her track the problem as she switched to a new sheet of paper. As she copied over the initial
considered part of her step-by-step process because they were necessary for her to make sense of the
problem, she stated
symbols and“Oh—that’s one-half,
to help her track I wasasreading
the problem that as
she switched to y .” Katie’s
a 2new sheet ofrepresentation with a slanted
paper. As she copied
fraction bar was
over theperceptually
initial problem, similar to a “Oh—that’s
she stated y2 and so Dylan
one-half,took
I was thereading
deliberate step
that as y2.”ofKatie’s
differentiating
representation
this notation. When she withcopied
a slantedthe
fraction bar was
equation perceptually
verbatim similar
onto her tosecond
a y2 andpage,
so Dylan
shetook the
explained: “I’d
deliberate step of differentiating this notation. When she copied the equation verbatim onto her
recopy that over, this is why grad students hated grading my homework.” Throughout this problem,
second page, she explained: “I’d recopy that over, this is why grad students hated grading my
she tendedhomework.”
to operateThroughout
on only one side of the
this problem, equation
she tended at a time,
to operate on onlycopying
one sidethe other
of the sideatwithout
equation a any
changes. Shetime,explained:
copying the other “I try not
side to doany
without multiple
changes. operations
She explained:at “I once. [It’s]
try not to also a good
do multiple way to catch
operations
errors.” Asatwas
once.often
[It’s] also
theacase,
good Dylan’s
way to catch errors.” As
consistent was often (distributing
processes the case, Dylan’sfirst
consistent processesconverting
and always
(distributing first and always converting to a common denominator) resulted in her solving a more
to a common denominator) resulted in her solving a more lengthy and complex problem.
lengthy and complex problem.
Figure 9. Dylan’s written solution for 12x + 5 − 3 = 6, illustrating how she shows all steps of her solution
Figure 9. Dylan’s written solution for 12x + 5 − 3 = 6, illustrating how she shows all steps of her solution process.
process.
As was evident in each of the examples, Dylan’s consistent processes enabled her to make sense of
As was evident in each of the examples, Dylan’s consistent processes enabled her to make sense
hard to conceptualize values, and provided a consistent approach to solving problems to enable her to
of hard to track
conceptualize
her progress.values, and provided
This approach, however,aoften
consistent
resultedapproach
in more timeto and
solving
effortproblems
because of to
theenable her
demands of each of the consistent processes and because implementing these
to track her progress. This approach, however, often resulted in more time and effort because processes sometimes led of the
to her solving a problem in a less optimized way and therefore solving a more difficult
demands of each of the consistent processes and because implementing these processes sometimes led problem.
to her solving
3.1.5. aGrounding
problemthe inAbstract
a less optimized way and therefore solving a more difficult problem.
Dylan had difficulty understanding abstract or decontextualized numbers, operations and
3.1.5. Grounding the Abstract
concepts. She explained that numbers and concepts were often not sufficiently connected to
Dylanmeaningful contexts:
had difficulty “You learn thisabstract
understanding really abstract concept for 5 + 3 = numbers,
or decontextualized 8. What is the 5? What is and
operations the concepts.
3? What is the 8?” To try to make sense of numbers and concepts, she would try to connect these
She explained that numbers and concepts were often not sufficiently connected to meaningful contexts:
symbols and ideas to the real world. She recommended helping students develop a meaning of
“You learnnumber
this really abstract
by starting concept for 5“Now
with manipulatives: + 3 we= 8.
haveWhat is the and
these objects 5? we
What is the
can start 3? them.”
to label What is the 8?”
To try to make sense
“I found visualofthings
numbers
to clickand
with concepts,
me a little bitshe would
better, try to
if someone connect
uses these symbols
manipulatives.” and ideas to
Dylan found
the real world. She recommended helping students develop a meaning of number by starting with
manipulatives: “Now we have these objects and we can start to label them.” “I found visual things
to click with me a little bit better, if someone uses manipulatives.” Dylan found that manipulatives
helped her connect to the underlying meanings of the symbols, and having an opportunity to move,
cut, combine and interact with these manipulatives was helpful for Dylan in conceptualizing quantities
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 13 of 19
and operations on quantities. “When I’m struggling with a concept, if I can give it a really concrete
foundation, it will stick with me much better.”
In addition to concretely representing quantities with manipulatives, Dylan found it helpful if
she could connect the concept to a real world application. Because she found mathematics connected
to application easier to understand, she found statistics more accessible because it had an applied
component where patterns in data were quantified.
Dylan: “The reason why it’s funny that I did statistics, but it makes a lot of sense, is that if I
could take one of these concepts and apply it to something that was actually tangible to me,
so like the percentage of people that are over the age of 55 that have a landline phone, if I
come up with these stories or narratives, then I could actually recall how to do an operation,
but I had to have some sort of narrative that was actually based in the real world.”
She found that the internet was a good resource for helping her understand the purpose behind
particular concepts or ideas. “If you are approaching a subject, before you even dive into it just go out
into the world of the internet and try to figure out how people even use this and then go back into the
abstract.” She explained,
Dylan: “Sometimes I would google “real life examples of blah blah blah” because even if it
wasn’t that exact problem, all the sudden if I could connect to that—Oh! That’s why I need
to know this. I really struggled with math when I was like “why are we learning this?”
Dylan found herself often turning to the internet for these kinds of real world connection because
her tutors were often ill-equipped to provide this kind of grounding, which she described as “another
big problem in the math community.”
3.2. Structural Barriers

In her discussions with Cindy and her interview with Katie, Dylan identified several structural
barriers she encountered. These were policies and practices which marginalized her participation
in upper division mathematics classes. Dylan explained “in my first semester, I failed my two
weeder classes.” The “weeder” courses (e.g., calculus and linear algebra) are predicated on the
assumption that if a student cannot pass the class, they are not enough of a “math person” to succeed.
After being diagnosed with a disability, she was told that the primary accommodation for students
with dyscalculia at UC Berkeley was to waive the university’s mathematics requirement. We view
this as an exclusionary practice, which, rather than accommodating for disabilities, excludes those
individuals from participation in mathematics—and by extension all other STEM fields. Not only were
the policies exclusionary, but she was actively discouraged from pursuing and completing her degree
in statistics.
Dylan: “The math department is very unaccommodating. People in math tend to have
an attitude of, if you can do it then great, if you can’t, then you’re just not meant to be.
Which is ridiculous, because it’s not acceptable to not be able to read, so I don’t know how
it’s acceptable to not be able to do math. I got told that I should probably drop out of Berkeley
and reapply the next semester into a different degree program. At this point I was a junior in
college. Which is not really possible, it’s like, no I’m committed.”
The institutional policies and advising practices were exclusionary and Dylan was left to figure
out how to navigate this system on her own.
Dylan: “The way I was able to get through was brute force. I had this professor, and she said
there are two kinds of mathematicians: those that are smarter than everyone else, and those
that work harder. And so I worked harder. I took classes multiple times, I created this
incredible library of stuff, I have this really specific system of how I write and rewrite . . .
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 14 of 19
In order to learn a basic concept, I would attack it from every angle until something stuck.
So it was just brute force, and working harder than everyone else. Which is frustrating,
right? Because you are being asked to do a phenomenal amount more work than anyone
else in this class has to do and it would be really lovely if we just lived in a world where we
were given lots of options of all these different ways of learning this one particular concept.
And unfortunately, right now you have to cultivate all these different ways yourself.”
Not only did she have to spend considerably more effort than her peers just to transform the
mathematics into a form that was accessible, but she was given no support to do this.
Although she was able to succeed by developing compensatory strategies, these all required
more time and effort, which was not easily accounted for in the standard instructional or assessment
approaches. Dylan explained how her compensatory strategies resulted in her having to take classes
multiple times:
Dylan: “When I’m learning something, I try to remove myself really quick, and go learn why
would I ever do this, what are the definitions of all these terms, then come up with my note
taking system for how I’m going to do it, then I can dive into the subject. Needless to say,
this is why I had to take so many classes in college a couple times.”
Dylan’s demanding compensatory strategies did enable her to access mathematics, but not always
at the pace that she needed to pass her classes the first time through. Dylan remarked that taking
classes multiple times was “very expensive,” and paying for tutors placed an additional financial
strain upon her.
In these sessions, Dylan identified time as the most significant structural barrier: “Time is always
the hugest block.” Implementing her compensatory strategies took more time, and this was time she
was not afforded on assessments. She explained how this time constraint was arbitrary and did not
match her experiences in her career as a data analyst.
Dylan: “It’s really really unfortunate to me, I think that, in mathematics, it’s not just that
you understand the concept. It’s not just that you can get a correct answer, you also have
to do it in a certain amount of time, which inevitably is like this really bizarre artificial
constraint. Especially now that I’ve worked in industry at as a data analyst. And yes, I had
time constraints, I had to get a report done in this amount of time or whatnot. It’s nothing
like sitting down for a test and you have 60 min to do this insane page of stuff and this
huge mental dump, where these kinds of rewriting things would really become problematic,
I would just flat out run out of time. I would have to either not rewrite things and inevitably
make mistakes or rewrite things and not finish exams. I would have to make calculated
decisions at the beginning of exams.”
Not only were the structures of assessment (time constraints) and the policies (weeder classes and
disability waivers) sending messages to Dylan that she did not belong in upper division mathematics
classes, but she often had graduate students devaluing her legitimate approaches to solving problems.
In implementing her compensatory strategies, she often encountered resistance because she did show
all her steps and methodically wrote and rewrote notation so that she could understand its meaning.
“I would also frequently get the professor’s assistants that would grade our work; they would gripe
that my solutions were too long”. Graduate students, prioritizing the economy of notation, identified
Dylan’s processes as problematic.
Dylan: “I had grad students—one in particular, I think it was multivariate calculus—he
would write on the top of my assignments “please shorten steps” or whatever because he
has to grade x numbers of assignments and he hated how verbose mine were.”
Dylan experienced significant structural barriers in completing her statistics degree. These existed
within the policies and practices at the institutional level, and also in her individual interactions with
people tasked with evaluating her competency.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 15 of 19
3.3. Instructional Recommendations

Throughout the video recordings, Dylan made references to instructional recommendations she
had for teachers, parents, and students. These recommendations came from her own experiences
and were informed by two years of tutoring students with disabilities in mathematics. In Dylan’s
recommendations for instructing students with dyscalculia, several themes emerged.
1. Identify issues of
3.3. Instructional access, particularly in notation. Dylan often assessed this by asking students
Recommendations
to write out all numerals and mathematical
Throughout the video recordings, Dylan made symbols
references tothey knew. She
instructional noted if students
recommendations she inverted
numbers (e.g., wrote
had for teachers, parents,18and
as students.
81), misread numbers (e.g.,came
These recommendations reading 6 as
from her a 9),
own or confused
experiences and operators
were
(e.g., informed
solved by two years
subtraction of tutoring She
as addition). students
would with disabilities
discuss anyinissues
mathematics. In Dylan’s
of perceptual similarity and
recommendations for instructing students with dyscalculia, several themes emerged.
suggest the student change the form of their notation or use graph paper or color to space and
1. Identify
organize theirissues of access,
notation particularly in notation. Dylan often assessed this by asking students
sufficiently.
to write out all numerals and mathematical symbols they knew. She noted if students inverted
2. Identify and build on the student’s strengths. Dylan asked students to explain their areas of
numbers (e.g., wrote 18 as 81), misread numbers (e.g., reading 6 as a 9), or confused operators
strengths(e.g.,(e.g.,
solved language,
subtractionorganization)
as addition). She andwould would
discussuse
any this
issuestoofthink about
perceptual how to
similarity andsupport their
understanding
suggest theof mathematics.
student change the Forformexample, she might
of their notation havepaper
or use graph a student label
or color their
to space andaddition and
organize
subtraction their notation
problems withsufficiently.
“add” or “sub” (see Figure 10) to help them attend to the difference in
2. Identify and build on the student’s strengths. Dylan asked students to explain their areas of
the operator symbol.
strengths (e.g., language, organization) and would use this to think about how to support their
3. Connect the mathematics to something
understanding of mathematics. meaningful.
For example, she might Dylan recommended
have a student label their always contextualizing
addition and
subtraction problems with “add” or “sub” (see Figure 10) to help
mathematics in terms of something that was concrete for the student, either physical them attend to the difference
in the operator symbol.
manipulatives or real world contexts.
3. Connect the mathematics to something meaningful. Dylan recommended always
4. Teach and allow formathematics
contextualizing multiple solution
in terms ofpaths.
somethingDylanthat recommended
was concrete for the teaching
student, multiple
either ways to
understand
physicalamanipulatives
concept and multiple
or real problem solving approaches. The value of a particular
world contexts.
4. Teachshould
approach and allowbefordetermined
multiple solution
by paths.
whetherDylanitrecommended
enables theteachingstudent multiple ways tosense of the
to make
understand a concept and multiple problem solving approaches. The value of a particular
mathematics, rather than whether it is efficient (e.g., standard algorithms).
approach should be determined by whether it enables the student to make sense of the
5. Give student agency
mathematics, over
rather reflecting
than whether itand determining
is efficient whatalgorithms).
(e.g., standard works for them. Dylan was careful not
5. Give student
to generalize fromagency
her ownover experiences
reflecting and determining
and repeatedly what works for them. the
emphasized Dylan was careful of students
importance
not to generalize from her own experiences and repeatedly emphasized the importance of
figuring out what systems would work for them.
students figuring out what systems would work for them.
Figure 10. Illustration of how Dylan recommends that students she works with color code and use
Figure 10. Illustration
language of how
to make clear whatDylan recommends
the mathematical that
operation students
means for eachshe works with color code and use
problem.
language to make clear what the mathematical operation means for each problem.
4. Discussion
Dylan’s case provides unique insight into her experience majoring in statistics as a student with
4. Discussion
dyscalculia and enables us to counter common myths about disability and mathematics. We discuss
Dylan’s
each ofcase provides
the myths raisedunique insight into
in the introduction herofexperience
in light Dylan’s case majoring
and call for in statistics
shifts asand
in policies a student with
practices to address the kinds of structural barriers Dylan encountered.
dyscalculia and enables us to counter common myths about disability and mathematics. We argue that removal of We discuss
barriers is the only way to disrupt these pervasive myths at a more systemic level.
each of the myths raised in the introduction in light of Dylan’s case and call for shifts in policies and
practices4.1.
toCountering
addressthe the kinds
Myth: of structural
Dyscalculia barriers
Results from InherentDylan
Cognitiveencountered.
Deficits We argue that removal of
barriers is the
In this paper, we reconceptualized dyscalculia as a cognitive difference rather thanlevel.
only way to disrupt these pervasive myths at a more systemic as a cognitive
deficit. This framing has enabled us to examine the ways in which standard tools (e.g., symbolic
4.1. Countering
notation)the Myth:
were Dyscalculia
not always Resultstofrom
fully accessible Inherent
Dylan. Unlike aCognitive Deficits
deficit approach, which would simply
determine that Dylan solved problems more slowly than her peers, our analysis revealed that the
In this paper, we reconceptualized dyscalculia as a cognitive difference rather than as a cognitive deficit.
This framing has enabled us to examine the ways in which standard tools (e.g., symbolic notation) were not
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 16 of 19
always fully accessible to Dylan. Unlike a deficit approach, which would simply determine that Dylan
solved problems more slowly than her peers, our analysis revealed that the compensatory strategies she
implemented to gain access often required more time and effort. This framing not only provides unique
insights into dyscalculia but also suggests an alternative approach for instruction. The “problems”
Dylan encountered were in the accessibility of standard mathematical tools. This suggests that rather
than attempting to change or fix something about the student—the focus of most current intervention
approaches (e.g., [21])—we need to consider how to address students’ issues of access. This may be
accomplished through the development and use of alternative tools (e.g., providing students with
graph paper and allowing them to use colored pens), or by helping the student develop compensatory
strategies. This shift from deficit to difference is not mere semantics but fundamentally changes
the perceived origin of the disability. This reframing is not only important for researchers, but for
teachers and parents. Teachers who see student difficulties as resulting from an internal characteristic
of the student (i.e., deficits) are less likely to see instruction as a productive approach to help the
student learn [22,23]. By identifying the inaccessibility of standard tools, it empowers educators to
consider how to address these access issues and places the onus for addressing them on instruction.
This paper has established the benefits of understanding dyscalculia in terms of difference because it
highlights both issues of access in the material tools, suggests that designing more accessible tools may
provide greater access, and highlights how individuals can compensate to gain access to otherwise
inaccessible content.
4.2. Countering the Myth: Students with Dyscalculia Cannot Learn Higher Level Mathematics
Although there is a pervasive belief that students with dyscalculia cannot be successful in
mathematics, Dylan clearly counters this myth. She was able to complete her statistics degree at
UC Berkeley and go on to work as a data analyst. Dylan’s success was largely due to her determination
and “brute force” refusing to give up. She encountered both a college system that did not provide
sufficient accommodations as well as policies and procedures which marginalized her participation in
mathematics. She was forced to develop and continuously refine systems on her own to enable her
to complete upper division mathematics classes. She had to pay for tutors and take classes multiple
times in order to pass them. Clearly the onus should not be on the student like it was in Dylan’s
case. In order to sufficiently support students, it is important to understand the issues of access
that students will experience across mathematics topics and begin to design alternative tools to help
students compensate.
4.3. Countering the Myth: Students Must Master the “Basics” to Succeed
Because mathematics is often seen as a hierarchical topic domain, it may feel sensible that
students need to first have a foundation in the basics before progressing on to higher level
mathematics. Dylan’s experience helps challenge this widely-held belief and demonstrates how
it may be exclusionary to require particular kinds of competency before enabling a student to explore
more complex concepts. Dylan had difficulty comparing unit fractions, but was able to understand and
manipulate complicated rational expressions modeling statistical phenomenon. Dylan still struggled
to retrieve basic number combinations while she was taking linear algebra, but she was able to make
sense of complex mathematics concepts and complete a major in statistics. This suggests that there may
be some students who never master the “basics,” and that these students should not be excluded from
participation in higher level mathematics. This raises further questions around the use of remedial
mathematics courses in college, which not only limit students’ access to college level mathematics,
but are identified as the primary barrier for students in completing their degrees [24].
4.4. Countering the Myth: Speed and Efficiency Are Important

Research on dyscalculia that quantifies student performance based on speed and accuracy or
classifies some approaches as “immature” because they are less efficient (e.g., [25]) has contributed
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 17 of 19
to this problematic myth. Dylan’s use of her compensatory strategies often resulted in her taking
more time and often required more steps. Dylan was told by multiple TAs that she needed to shorten
her solutions. However, these compensatory strategies were precisely what enabled her to access the
mathematics. Speed and efficiency were not essential components of Dylan’s success. This suggests
that instruction that prioritizes speed and efficiency in mathematics can have detrimental results
for students and may marginalize students’ participation in higher level mathematics. Dylan’s case
suggests that if we want mathematics to be accessible for all, we should encourage multiple solution
paths, even those that do not adhere to the mathematic aesthetic of economy of notation.
4.5. Removing Structural Barriers

Dylan encountered numerous structural and systemic barriers. In this section, we identify the
barriers that Dylan described and recommend approaches to remove these barriers. In doing so,
we raise questions about mathematics disciplinary norms which may unintentionally perpetuate these
systemic barriers.
Dylan described time as being the biggest issue for her in succeeding and completing her statistics
major. She was allowed the standard accommodation of time-and-a-half on exams, but this was often
woefully insufficient for her to implement the compensatory strategies she needed to enable her to
access the mathematics. Dylan called this time constraint “artificial” and notes that in her career as a
data analyst she was never under this kind of intense time pressure. This raises the question: why
do mathematics tests have a time limit? Is it because the mathematics community endorses the myth
that mathematics is about speed and efficiency? Dylan would have been much more successful if she
had been able to take untimed assessments. Weeder classes and timed assessments limit participation
in higher level mathematics and in turn other STEM fields. Disproportionate representation may
be largely due to these kinds of policies and practices which privilege a certain kind of student
and a certain way of doing mathematics. We should begin to hold math departments accountable
for the disproportionate representation of students who survive their “weeder” classes and require
justification for constraints placed on students in terms of time. We argue that structural components
of “weeder” mathematics classes and timed tests should be rethought if we hope to address the racial,
gender, and disability disparities within the STEM fields.
Another continual source of frustration for Dylan was that she was unable to get sufficient
accommodations or financial support for tutoring. Her primary “accommodation” was that she
was allowed to waive the university mathematics requirement—an exclusionary policy and practice.
She bore the financial responsibility for paying to retake courses and for support from tutors. The tutors
that she paid were not skilled in providing the kinds of support she needed. She asked tutors to
translate symbols into words and help her understand the applicability of concepts that she was
learning. These mathematics graduate students were unable to do so. This calls us to consider how we
define mathematics proficiency. Clearly, these tutors were deemed skilled in mathematics given their
status as mathematics graduate students at a prestigious university, and yet they could not unpack
the meaning behind the symbols they so effortlessly manipulated. How might we want all professors
and TAs to be able to translate symbols into words and contextualize abstract mathematics concepts
in meaningful real world applications? In raising this question, we reframe Dylan’s need for symbol
translation as a desirable goal that should be considered part of standard mathematical proficiency.
To address the systematic marginalization of individuals with disabilities, colleges should evaluate
their disability accommodation practices to determine if they are exclusionary, as with the ones
Dylan encountered. True accommodations for Dylan would have been (a) untimed assessments;
(b) financial support for tutors who were qualified to provide support; and (c) materials which
provided a translation of notation into words and concrete examples of the concepts she was learning.
As colleges revise accommodation policies, it is essential to involve individuals with disabilities in the
process of assessing current practices and determining what policies and practices remain oppressive
and exclusionary.
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 18 of 19
5. Conclusions
Dylan’s experience as a statistician with dyscalculia provides evidence countering many common
myths about mathematics and ability. She provides a clear example of how students with dyscalculia
can be successful in upper division mathematics and have a career in the field. Her experiences
highlight both how she encountered issues of access with standard mathematical forms and also how
she was able to develop a complex repository of strategies to compensate. In completing her degree,
Dylan was not disabled by how her brain processed number differently, but by the systemic policies and
procedures which marginalized her participation in mathematics. In order to fully counter entrenched
myths about ability and mathematics we believe it is necessary to dismantle these oppressive policies
and procedures which artificially constrain who has access to mathematics.
Author Contributions: Katherine Lewis and Dylan Lynn participated in all stages of this research project,
including, design, data collection, and analysis. Katherine Lewis wrote the initial draft of the paper with
Dylan Lynn providing substantial feedback and recommendations.
Acknowledgments: A grant from the University of Washington covered the cost of publishing in open access.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The founding sponsors had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the
decision to publish the results.
References
1. Lewis, K.E.; Lynn, D.M. An insider’s view of a mathematics learning disability: Compensating to gain access
to fractions. Investig. Math. Learn. 2018, in press. [CrossRef]
2. Lewis, K.E.; Lynn, D.M. Access through compensation: Emancipatory view of a mathematics learning
disability. Cognit. Instruct.. in press.
3. Shalev, R.S. Prevalence of developmental dyscalculia. In Why is Math So Hard for Some Children? The Nature
and Origins of Mathematical Learning Difficulties and Disabilities; Berch, D.B., Mazzocco, M.M.M., Eds.; Paul, H.
Brookes: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2007; pp. 49–60.
4. Devine, A.; Hill, F.; Carey, E.; Szűcs, D. Cognitive and emotional math problems largely dissociate: Prevalence
of developmental dyscalculia and mathematics anxiety. J. Educ. Psychol. 2018, 110, 431–444. [CrossRef]
5. Butterworth, B. Foundational numerical capacities and the origins of dyscalculia. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2010, 14,
534–541. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Desoete, A.; Ceulemans, A.; De Weerdt, F.; Pieters, S. Can we predict mathematical learning disabilities from
symbolic and non-symbolic comparison tasks in kindergarten? Findings from a longitudinal study. Br. J.
Educ. Psychol. 2012, 82, 64–81. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7. Butterworth, B.; Varma, S.; Laurillard, D. Dyscalculia: From brain to education. Science 2011, 332, 1049–1053.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Mazzocco, M.M.M.; Devlin, K.T.; McKenney, S.J. Is it a fact? Timed arithmetic performance of children with
mathematical learning disabilities (MLD) varies as a function of how MLD is defined. Dev. Neuropsychol.
2008, 33, 318–344. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Mazzocco, M.M.M.; Myers, G.F.; Lewis, K.E.; Hanich, L.B.; Murphy, M.M. Limited knowledge of fraction
representations differentiates middle school students with mathematics learning disability (dyscalculia)
versus low mathematics achievement. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2013, 115, 371–387. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10. Murphy, M.M.; Mazzocco, M.M.M.; Hanich, L.B.; Early, M.C. Cognitive characteristics of children with
mathematics learning disability (MLD) vary as a function of the cutoff criterion used to define MLD.
J. Learn. Disabil. 2007, 40, 458–478. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Geary, D.C. Mathematical disabilities: Reflections on cognitive, neuropsychological, and genetic components.
Learn. Individ. Differ. 2010, 20, 130–133. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Geary, D.C.; Hoard, M.K.; Bailey, D.H. Fact Retrieval Deficits in Low Achieving Children and Children with
Mathematical Learning Disability. J. Learn. Disabil. 2012, 45, 291–307. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Lewis, K.E.; Fisher, M.B. Taking stock of 40 years of research on mathematical learning disability:
Methodological issues and future directions. J. Res. Math. Educ. 2016, 47, 338–371. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63 19 of 19
14. Swanson, H.L. Cognitive Aspects of Math Disabilities. In Why is Math So Hard for Some Children? The Nature
and Origins of Mathematical Learning Difficulties and Disabilities; Berch, D.B., Mazzocco, M.M.M., Eds.; Paul H
Brookes Publishing: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2007; pp. 133–146. ISBN 978-1-55766-864-6.
15. Oliver, M. Changing the social relations of research production? Disabil. Handicap Soc. 1992, 7, 101–114.
[CrossRef]
16. Vygotsky, L.S. Introduction: Fundamentals problems of defectology. In The Collected Works of L. S. Vygotsky,
Volume 2: The Fundamentals of Defectology; Rieber, R.W., Carton, A.S., Eds.; Plenum Press: London, NY, USA,
1929; ISBN 0-306-42442-8.
17. Thaler, L.; Arnott, S.R.; Goodale, M.A. Neural correlates of natural human echolocation in early and late
blind echolocation experts. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, 1–16. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Mercer, G. From critique to practice: Emancipatory disability research. In Implementing the Social Model of
Disability: Theory and Research; Barnes, C., Mercer, G., Eds.; The Disability Press: Leeds, UK, 2004; pp. 118–137.
19. Barnes, C. “Emancipatory disability research”: Project or process? J. Res. Spec. Educ. Needs 2002, 2, 1–8.
[CrossRef]
20. Stone, E.; Priestley, M. Parasites, pawns and partners: Disability research and the role of non-disabled
researchers. Br. J. Sociol. 1996, 47, 699–716. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Moser Opitz, E.; Freesemann, O.; Prediger, S.; Grob, U.; Matull, I.; Hußmann, S. Remediation for students
with mathematics difficulties: An intervention study in middle schools. J. Learn. Disabil. 2017, 50, 724–736.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Jackson, K.; Gibbons, L.; Sharpe, C.J. Teachers’ views of students’ mathematical capabilities: Challenges and
possibilities for ambitious reform. Teach. Coll. Rec. 2017, 119, 1–43.
23. Wilhelm, A.G.; Munter, C.; Jackson, K. Examining relations between teachers’ explanations of sources of
students’ difficulty in mathematics and students’ opportunities to learn. Elem. Sch. J. 2017, 117, 345–370.
[CrossRef]
24. Silva, E.; White, T. Pathways to Improvement: Using Psychological Strategies to Help College Students Master
Developmental Math; Carnegie Foundation: Stanford, CA, USA, 2013.
25. Geary, D.C.; Bow-Thomas, C.C.; Yao, Y. Counting knowledge and skill in cognitive addition: A comparison
of normal and mathematically disabled children. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 1992, 54, 372–391. [CrossRef]
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Education Sciences: Against The Odds: Insights From A Statistician With Dyscalculia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Education Sciences: Against The Odds: Insights From A Statistician With Dyscalculia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

education

Keywords: dyscalculia; learning disability; mathematics; access; accommodations; compensation;

Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, 63; doi:10.3390/educsci8020063 www.mdpi.com/journal/education

• Dyscalculia results from inherent cognitive deficits within the individual;

Myths about mathematics:

• Students must master the “basics” to succeed in higher-level mathematics;

1.1. Understanding Dyscalculia as Difference

Figure 1. Illustration contrasting a deficit view and a difference view of dyscalculia.

1.2. Emancipatory Research Approach

3.1. Overview of Dylan’s Issues of Access, Tools, and Compensatory Strategies

3.1.1. Rewriting in Words

3.1.2. Creating a Dictionary

3.1.3. Rewriting with Consistency

Educ. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 19

3.1.4. Consistent Solution

3.2. Structural Barriers

3.3. Instructional Recommendations

4.4. Countering the Myth: Speed and Efficiency Are Important

4.5. Removing Structural Barriers

You might also like