Abstract
Background: South African pre-service teachers (PSTs) mostly learn to teach mathematics in English, yet are expected to teach learners bilingually, including their mother tongue, considering the introduction of Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education (MTBBE). Pre-service teachers must develop their teaching in ways that enable learners’ access to meaning using communicative resources such as multimodal and bilingual teaching.
Aim: To provide a methodological contribution to how researchers might analyse multimodal bilingual teaching practices to support teachers’ reflection on their communicative practices in mathematics teaching.
Setting: This study took place with intermediate-phase (Grade 4–6) PSTs in their mathematics methodology course at a higher education institution in South Africa’s Eastern Cape province.
Methods: In this qualitative formative intervention, we purposively sampled one representative PST’s micro-teaching bilingual video and one English demonstration video to show the emergent coding system that was iteratively refined for in-depth analysis.
Results: A useful coding system is revealed, enabling analysis and reflection on how the PST enacted multimodal bilingual teaching of the Jump Strategy. In this case, the PST enacted most of the multimodal elements from the baseline video and fluidly moved between isiXhosa, English, and loanwords to support learner access to meaning-making.
Conclusion: The coding system allowed for in-depth analysis of the PST’s video to better understand the nature of multimodal and bilingual teaching.
Contribution: The methodological contribution suggests an analytic coding system to explore the nature of multimodal bilingual teaching. This system, we argue, could be used effectively to support PSTs’ reflection on their multimodal and bilingual repertoires when teaching mathematics (especially important in the context of MTBBE).
Keywords: multimodal communication; bilingual education; pre-service teachers; mental mathematics; calculation strategies; mental starter assessment programme.
Introduction
Background
The Language of Learning and Teaching (LoLT) at almost all universities in South Africa is English (Kluyts et al. 2024; Ngidi & Mncwango 2022), and thus pre-service teachers (PSTs) tend to learn how to teach mathematics in English (Olawale, Hendricks & Rusi 2024). Yet PSTs bring with them a wealth of linguistic resources in languages they speak, beyond English, that many will use in teaching their primary school learners. The recent Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education (MTBBE) programme in South Africa (Department of Basic Education [DBE] 2025) means that current PSTs need to develop productive bilingual teaching practices. This follows much local research that has pointed to a problematic monolingual bias in our schooling system (for example, Essien et al. 2024; Robertson & Graven 2023). There are, however, challenges with implementing MTBBE, such as the availability of resources in all official languages beyond Grade 3, the absence of bilingual resources and, importantly, the absence of professional development (or clear guidelines) focused on productive bilingual teaching practices – both in general and specific to mathematics teaching (Prediger 2019).
Guided broadly by Vygotskian theory and specifically by models of bilingual education, this study explores how PSTs develop bilingual and teaching practices (combined oral, written, and gestured explanations) when enacting micro-teaching of additive reasoning calculation strategies, specifically the Jump Strategy on the empty number line (ENL). To understand this, the problem arose of how one might analyse the short (between 1-min and 2-min) micro-teaching video recordings of the PSTs’ explanations. A rigorous system of analysis was necessary to explore the nature of the PSTs’ use of multimodal communication and bilingual language use. We therefore focus on a methodological contribution in this article to answer the research question: ‘How might one analyse recordings of PST multimodal and mother tongue-based bilingual explanations of calculation strategies on the empty number line?’. While this article emerges from repeatedly and iteratively analysing micro-teaching videos of the Jump Strategy for an imaginary isiXhosa-speaking learner, we expect that the system of analysis and coding developed may be of use to researchers, teachers and teacher educators analysing and reflecting on multimodal and bilingual teaching of mathematical ideas. Our findings are also likely to resonate with analyses of teaching episodes that use other South African languages, mediating representations and multimodal communication of mathematical ideas.
Policy on mother tongue education and teacher preparedness
Disparities exist in mathematics achievement between learners who always or often speak the LoLT and those who do not speak it at home, as learning mathematics in one’s second or third language is challenging (DBE 2024; Heugh 2021; Prediger 2019). Robertson and Graven (2020) promote additive bilingualism and the ‘legitimation of home language’ (p. 1), where learners’ home language is used alongside English (the LoLT), to increase access to mathematical meaning-making.
In South Africa, policies exist to promote meaning-making through the inclusion of mother tongue, such as the Language in Education Policy (LiEP) that promotes multilingualism in teaching (Department of Education, 1997), and the recently introduced MTBBE programme, implemented at the beginning of 2025 in Grade 4 South African public schools, with extension to the next grade each following year. Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education is described by the DBE (2025) as ‘an intentional focus on using the language resources that children bring from home to school as a basis to learn, while learning other languages’.
Despite such language policies, explicitly preparing teachers and PSTs to teach mathematics in bi- and multilingual contexts remains challenging (Essien 2010; Kasari & Steffensen 2026; Zulu & Brijlall 2024). According to Prediger (2019), in an international context, a lack of research-informed professional development is partly responsible for such disparities in policy and practice. From the perspective of South African PSTs, their training is predominantly in English, leaving them feeling unprepared to teach mathematics in bilingual classroom contexts (Olawale et al. 2024). According to Robertson and Graven (2020), teachers lack the confidence to teach mathematics in these diverse language contexts.
It is the responsibility of teacher education courses to support PSTs in developing strategies for teaching mathematics in bi- and multilingual contexts (Olawale et al. 2024; Van der Walt & Ruiters 2012). Challenges around mother tongue teaching need to be considered when training PSTs. The standardised version of learners’ mother tongue is not always the same dialect they speak at home (Booi, Vale & Graven 2024; Sapire 2021; Van der Walt 2016). This too needs to be considered when training PSTs to teach in bilingual contexts.
We therefore argue that the use of multimodal communication and bilingual teaching is necessary to enhance opportunities for learners to access mathematical meaning —– and, in this respect, developing ways to research multimodal communication and bilingual teaching of mathematics is important. In this study, PSTs were encouraged to use multimodal and bilingual explanations to teach the Jump Strategy (jumping in tens and ones on the ENL).
The gap and our intended contribution
While research has been done on the perspectives of PSTs on their preparedness to teach in learners’ mother tongue based on their training in English (for example, Olawale et al. 2024), a gap exists in understanding how pre-service teaching explanations (whether in micro-teaching or during practicum) can be analysed to better understand the nature of PSTs’ use of multimodal communication and bilingualism. In addition, developing teachers’ reflective practice has been widely considered, since Dewey (1933), to be an essential aspect of professional development (see, for example, Collin, Karsenti and Komis (2013) review of the literature on reflective practice for PST education). Indeed, Dewey (1933) claimed, ‘it is impossible to become, and continue to be, an effective teacher without a personal commitment to reflective practice’ (p. 9). However, Collin et al. (2013) note that it is not a simple practice to develop or teach. Support frameworks are needed to assist (pre-service) teachers in reflecting on key aspects of lessons that may strengthen their teaching. For example, Karsenty and Arcavi’s (2017) six-lens framework was developed to support attention to six different aspects of mathematics teaching (e.g., explicit and implicit goals; tasks and activities), yet it does not include a focus on language use or forms of multimodal communication. Our contribution here is to provide a coding frame that can be used by researchers and teacher educators to support reflection on the forms of communication (specifically multimodal and language use) that we believe will be particularly useful in bilingual or multilingual contexts, especially considering MTBBE.
Mental Starter Assessment Programme teacher resources
The study reported in this article centres on the use of the multilingual Mental Starter Assessment Programme (MSAP) resources, in the form of a teacher guide (Graven et al. 2020). The DBE advocates for the use of the MSAP resources and strategies in the daily 10-min mental mathematics component of the curriculum (DBE 2011). The MSAP model includes six mental calculation strategies; however, this article focuses on the Jump Strategy (Graven et al. 2020). The Jump Strategy refers to making use of an ENL to show addition or subtraction. Mental Starter Assessment Programme resources include a teacher guide (in all 11 official spoken languages) with scripted lessons (Graven et al. 2020) and supportive YouTube videos (in English), which are referred to here as the baseline demonstration video.
Translanguaging: Multimodal and bilingual communication for access to meaning
Debate exists around the definitions of translanguaging (Bailey et al. 2025; Heugh 2021). In this article, we adopt the view that translanguaging involves communication of ideas through moving fluidly and flexibly between modes of communication in a natural bi-/multilingual setting, and that it is necessarily multimodal (Charamba 2022; García & Lin 2017; Li 2018).
According to Pierson, Clark and Brady (2021), multimodal communication such as writing, drawing and gesturing can also be considered translanguaging, as it draws on flexibility in multiple semiotic tools for communicating. This interpretation of translanguaging has the primary goal of access to meaning-making, which is relevant to this study, where the PSTs use multimodal and bilingual communication tools to explain the Jump Strategy on the ENL to learners from diverse language backgrounds, thereby navigating the space of introducing MTBBE.
Multimodal communication uses a combination of talk, text, visual representations and gestures to support learners in meaning-making (Pierson et al. 2021). This can be particularly useful in supporting learners whose home language is not the same as the LoLT. According to Pacheco et al. (2022), multimodal communication is a ‘complex activity’ that encourages teachers and learners to strategically use their full linguistic repertoire to access ‘authentic meaning-making experiences’ (p. 391). Sung et al. (2025) described how teaching and learning mathematics involve the use of multiple semiotic resources, such as oral and written words, gestures, drawings, graphs and mathematical symbols, and are therefore multimodal in nature.
Visual representations as a multimodal tool
Coetzer, Livingston and Barnard (2023) found in their study that using visual representations as part of isiXhosa Grade 1 learners’ semiotic resources was an effective strategy for developing conceptual understanding in mathematics. Similarly, Schäfer and Chikiwa (2019) found that using learners’ (isiXhosa) home language and visual representations supported the conceptual development of Grade 11 geometry and trigonometry concepts. The Jump Strategy in this study, aimed at primary mathematics, uses the ENL to visually represent additive operations. The ENL has been shown to support the development of number sense and mental calculation strategies in young learners, including those whose home language differs from the LoLT (Bobis 2007; Robertson & Graven 2020; Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen 2008). To analyse the micro-teaching videos in this study, writing numbers and drawing jumps on the ENL constituted the visual representation.
Gesturing as a multimodal tool
Gesturing includes a combination of hand movements, facial expressions, and body language to convey meaning (Kendon 2000; Rasmussen, Stephan & Allen 2004). Gesturing can support learning by making connections to abstract concepts (Van der Mescht 2023) and reducing learners’ cognitive load (Cook et al. 2017; Goldin-Meadow, Cook & Mitchell 2009; Rasmussen et al. 2004). Gesturing is also useful in bi-/multilingual contexts when used in combination with verbal explanation, as it can scaffold learners to develop conceptual understanding (Church, Ayman-Nolley & Mahootian 2004). In this study, the demonstration video in the teacher guide made use of gesture in two ways: pointing to a part of a calculation or a point on the ENL, and showing forwards (addition) or backwards (subtraction) directions of jumps on the ENL.
Bilingual teaching as part of a multimodal repertoire
In this study, we use the term ‘bilingual teaching’ to refer to a teacher’s use of at least two different languages when explaining a concept. Sapire’s (2021) study found that teachers readily used bilingualism to support understanding in their multilingual classes, as it allowed for ‘multiple access points’ (p. 190), especially given the lack of standardisation, in some African languages. Cummins (2008) advocates for second language learners to have equitable access to learning through bilingual education strategies. In this study, micro-teaching videos are analysed according to the PST’s use of isiXhosa, English and English loanwords within isiXhosa language structure.
Theoretical and conceptual framing
This study is broadly framed by Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory (1986), which emphasises that learning takes place in social contexts and, therefore, that language, as well as artefacts (such as the ENL in this study), is vital for communication, interaction and the mediation of learning. Vygotsky (1986) further suggested that learners would turn to their mother tongue to mediate learning a new language. In this study, language, including multimodal and bilingual communication (in this case, isiXhosa as the PST’s mother tongue and English) – in the context of a micro-teaching lesson to an imagined isiXhosa-speaking learner – is analysed to explore how PSTs might mediate the teaching and learning of the Jump Strategy using the ENL.
We adopt the perspective of language-as-a-resource (after Ruíz 1984), which Planas and Setati-Phakeng (2014) apply to a South African context. They explain that this view promotes the use of multiple languages for mathematics teaching, increasing access to meaning through developing a learner’s home language, second language (or the LoLT), and the mathematical concept. This perspective frames our exploration of PSTs’ use of multimodal and bilingual linguistic resources.
We also draw on models of bilingual education, as collated and illustrated by Robertson and Graven (2020), who suggest a continuum of bilingual immersion models ranging from most subtractive to most additive. Subtractive bilingualism refers to a learner being schooled in a language in which they are not fluent, having to learn a new language and academic content simultaneously, whereas a more additive approach to bilingualism would support learners in developing their second language alongside their mother tongue, using both as a resource for learning academic content. These models are useful in this study as we explore how PSTs enact multimodal and bilingual communication in an additive approach for making meaning accessible to their learners.
Research methods and design
This is a qualitative study framed through an interpretivist lens, as we sought to gain a rich, in-depth understanding (Creswell, 2013) of the bilingual and multimodal teaching videos. We adopt the view that knowledge construction is socially influenced (Willis, 2007), which is in line with Vygotsky’s (1986) sociocultural theory and coheres with our interpretivist lens. Furthermore, we label the broader study a formative intervention, following Engeström (2011) and based on Vygotskian principles, as the implementation of the MSAP Jump Strategy aimed to support PSTs’ real-life activity of mathematics teaching, particularly in a bilingual setting. The PSTs’ actions and initiative (Engeström 2011) in teaching and translanguaging are in focus. The intervention took place with a class of first-year intermediate phase (Grades 4–6) PSTs at a higher education institution in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, where English is the Language of Teaching and Learning. Most PSTs in this class were isiXhosa home language speakers, and it is the language predominantly spoken in this province, along with English and Afrikaans. These PSTs are likely to teach learners whose mother tongue is isiXhosa. For this article, we focus on the case of one PST, Teacher X2, who participated in this intervention, to provide an in-depth detail of how we analysed the multimodal and bilingual teaching of the Jump Strategy.
The mathematics teacher educator, also the first author, shared hardcopy English and electronic copy isiXhosa teacher guides of the MSAP resources with the PSTs, along with demonstrating the mental starter Jump Strategy in class – predominantly in English, with a few key words in isiXhosa and Afrikaans, respectively – and showing them the demonstration videos in English. Thereafter, PSTs were given the opportunity to record themselves micro-teaching an imagined learner whose home language is English and another whose home language is not English. Pre-service teachers opted to work from the English teacher guide’s scripted lessons (Graven et al. 2020) and translate their micro-teaching lessons for imagined isiXhosa learners, rather than using the isiXhosa teacher guide, which has been found to contain multiple inaccuracies with the translations (Booi et al. 2024).
Data were collected as short (around 2-min) videos that PSTs shared electronically. The first author transcribed these videos in their original language and then translated them into English. An isiXhosa-speaking colleague checked the isiXhosa transcription and the English translation, making alternative suggestions where necessary.
Forty videos were entered into the dataset, of which 14 were examples of teaching an imagined learner whose mother tongue is isiXhosa, 20 whose mother tongue is English, and six whose mother tongue is Afrikaans. We purposively selected the isiXhosa micro-teaching videos, as this was the mother tongue of most PSTs. isiXhosa is also a previously marginalised language and is of particular interest in the context of implementing the MTBBE programme in the Eastern Cape. We initially focused on the recordings of the six subtraction calculations, as these are more challenging to teach than the addition calculations. Of these six, three PSTs used bilingual explanations of the Jump Strategy in their videos (Teacher X2, Teacher X6 and Teacher X11), whereas the other three PSTs (Teacher X7, Teacher X12 and Teacher X13) taught the Jump Strategy in isiXhosa only. It is beyond the scope of this article to give details on each of these videos. As our focus in this article is on illuminating the coding system we developed to analyse the use of multimodal and bilingual strategies for teaching the Jump Strategy on the ENL, it suffices for us to focus on only one of the three teachers who used bilingual explanations.
The process of data analysis and the emergent coding system
For this article, in developing the coding system, we iteratively analysed all six teachers’ videos. From these six, one exemplar micro-teaching video (Teacher X2) was selected to show the in-depth analysis and the coding process, drawing findings on the nature of PSTs’ use of multimodal and bilingual teaching strategies. Additionally, we opted to analyse one of the English MSAP demonstration videos of a subtraction calculation (https://youtu.be/uFGzuToKGkA), using the Jump Strategy as a baseline to determine the nature of the multimodal communication used (with particular attention to writing and gesturing). This would allow us to compare the PSTs’ implementation fidelity – how closely the enactment of the intervention aligns with the original demonstration (O’Donnell 2008) – of the multimodal aspects, and then to focus on the PSTs’ own bilingual language use. The baseline demonstration video is in English only and is based on the MSAP scripted lessons in the teacher guide. This video was included by the MSAP task designers, and it is the proposed model for teachers, learners, and parents to follow. Similar videos are included in all the MSAP lesson starters and shared via a Quick Response (QR) code. The English baseline video was thus similarly transcribed to capture not only what was said but also what was written and gestured.
Transcriptions of the baseline video and Teacher X2’s video were broken up into smaller chunks of explanations for coding. Explanations were divided into units of ideas, instructions, sharing of information, and implicit questioning. For example, an idea would be ‘is going to be at this end of the line because I know I’ve got to jump back’. An example of an instruction would be ‘Plot the first number’. A statement sharing information could be: ‘I have to subtract and bridge through a multiple of 10 – a calculation like 62 minus 17’. And lastly, an example of an implicit question is ‘62 subtract 10’. In the transcript of the micro-teaching videos, these units are often at the sentence level. The baseline video was ‘chunked’ into 16 units (steps), and Teacher X2’s video into 14 units (steps).
The coding system emerged from iterative cycles of watching and rewatching the six videos, repeatedly analysing them in different ways, and returning to refine the analysis. Through ongoing discussion and refinement of coding, we were able to finalise our coding scheme. The analysis framework that emerged, along with its coding system, is shown in Figure 1.
 |
FIGURE 1: Analytical framework for coding the video explanations. |
|
As we watched and re-watched the micro-teaching videos and the baseline video, elements of multimodal and bilingual teaching emerged. Pre-service teachers used the ENL as a visual representation that they drew (a line), and on it they drew jumps (curved arrows) to indicate the subtraction operation in the Jump Strategy. Writing was used to communicate the calculation to be solved, to label the size of the jumps (e.g., −10), and to notate the answer. Visual representations were therefore coded as drawing (D), writing (W), or a combination of writing and drawing (listed in order of occurrence, separated by a semi-colon). We opted to separate writing from gesturing for the purpose of this analysis, while we acknowledge that writing and drawing are both forms of gesturing. For detailed analysis, we wanted to distinguish between the drawing of ENL representation and the inscriptions on it, the use of hand gestures with this representation, and the gesturing between this representation and the written problem the ENL is being used to solve.
In the micro-teaching and baseline videos, gestures included pointing to a number (on the ENL or as part of the written calculation), a point on the ENL, or a jump on it. These were often used to indicate the step in the problem-solving process being verbally described. Pointing was coded as P and jumps (coded as J) for analysis purposes, and when a combination of pointing and jumping appeared in a step, they were listed in order of occurrence, separated by a semicolon. Jumps were indicated by moving a hand backwards (for subtraction calculations) to convey the meaning of the operation and the size of the jump (tens being greater jumps than ones).
Spoken language use was coded as either mother tongue only (in this case, isiXhosa as an X) or English only (as an E) – as in the baseline demonstration video- or as bilingual (X & E), if both English and isiXhosa were used. The units (steps) of the bilingual explanations, in the PSTs’ micro-teaching videos, were thus coded as isiXhosa (X), English (E) or, in the case of a loanword from English spoken with isiXhosa structure of language (e.g., i-numberline-i), using the notation ‘E→X’. Further, we distinguished the use of English for number names as E-NN because, for some transcripts, English use tended to be limited to number names and thus it was useful to see where English was being used for general communication and where it was used for number names. We added a separate column for noting the language used for number names, as this would enable us to analyse whether language used for number names was consistent within a language or switched across the teaching video. Within several units, the PST used a combination of these, and each code appears in the order in which it occurs in the unit of spoken transcript, with parsing ([]) indicating the switches from one of these to another. For example, ‘[iSum] [yethu ithi] [eighty-three minus thirty-two] [is equal to dash.]’ was coded as E→X; X; E-NN; E. For gestures and drawings, if they were present in a unit of data, they were indicated with a G or D, respectively, and if not present, a hyphen (-) was used.
The transcripts were placed in a table, with the visual representations, gestures, language use, and number names divided into columns for listing, description, and coding. Each step had three rows to indicate: (1) what was said, written, or gestured, and what language was used in the video; (2) a description (usually with an image) of the details in (1); and (3) the notation for the coding system as described above. Due to space limitations, we excluded the second row in this article and removed the images from the table, as these are shown in the figures that follow. See Table 1 and Table 2 in the following section. After refining the coding system, we independently coded the demonstration and PST videos and then compared the coding. Where there were discrepancies, we discussed and reached a consensus. We took steps to enhance the trustworthiness of the study. Through thick description (Maxwell 2013), detailing the micro-teaching video transcripts and our coding and analysis process, we aimed for what Guba (1981) termed ‘trackability’ (p. 81) in a qualitative study. Others would be able to follow our detailed description to reach similar results from this data, or apply the same process in a different but similar context in a useful way, thereby promoting transferability.
| TABLE 1: Excerpt of analysis of Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video (steps 1–6 and 14). |
| TABLE 2: Summarising the three categories of language use in Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video. |
Ethical considerations
Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Nelson Mandela University Research Ethics Committee (Human) (No. H23-EDU-PGE-020). Ethical considerations included PSTs’ informed voluntary consent to participate in the study. This meant that they could opt to either enter their micro-teaching videos into the dataset or not. Micro-teaching videos recorded only PSTs’ hands, and no identifying markers were visible in the videos or screenshot images. Pre-service teachers’ right to anonymity was upheld using pseudonyms, and they had the right to withdraw at any stage. The submission of the micro-teaching videos did not count towards course marks.
Results
The results of the analysis and coding system are presented in two tables. Firstly, analysis of parts of Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video (steps 1–6 and 14) is presented in Table 1. The selection of these steps is to show an example of the detailed analysis that simultaneously accommodates the restricted space allowable for this article. The steps were purposively selected to show the start, initial setting up of the calculation and strategy, and the completion, including a variety of multimodal and bilingual elements being coded. Similarly, an analysis of parts of the baseline demonstration video is shown in Table 3 to show the coding of the multimodal (English only) teaching of a subtraction calculation using the Jump Strategy on the ENL. Each table with selected steps will be discussed. Thereafter, a summary table will be shown to compare the baseline and isiXhosa videos.
| TABLE 3: Extract of the analysis table of the baseline demonstration video (Steps 1–3, 5, 15–16). |
Teacher X2’s enactment of the Jump Strategy on the empty number line
The multimodal elements in this micro-teaching video include drawing of jumps on the ENL and writing numbers and operations on and around the ENL, gestures of the jumps and pointing, and then the use of translanguaging, moving fluidly between isiXhosa and English, with the use of loanwords from English using isiXhosa language structures. These can be shown in Table 1.
The visual representation of the Jump Strategy on the ENL is communicated through writing and drawing. Writing in this micro-teaching video, for example, involves writing the initial calculation problem to be solved (step 1), writing the numbers on the ENL (step 3), and writing the steps of the operation, such as ‘−10’ above the jump representations (steps 5 and 6). Some steps (e.g., step 4) have no new writing. Drawing in this video, for example, involves drawing the ENL (step 2), jumps of tens and units (e.g., steps 5 and 6), and in these steps, the PST also emphasises the point on the ENL where each jump ‘lands’ by drawing a slightly darker line on the point. An example of the writing and drawing can be seen in the screenshot taken from step 6 in Figure 2.
 |
FIGURE 2: Example screenshots of key steps in Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video. |
|
Gesturing is another multimodal tool for communicating the process of using the Jump Strategy on the ENL to solve this subtraction problem. Hand gestures moving from right to left above the ENL indicate the backwards movement for performing the subtraction operation. For example, in step 4, a shadow is seen in the video gesturing hand movement from right to left when saying ‘sibuy’umva’, the isiXhosa phrase for ‘we are going backwards’. Step 4, along with step 6, for example, includes pointing as a gesture. Here, pointing is used for bringing attention to a previous calculation (step 4) and to part of the visual representation (the land of the jump on the ENL) when checking its correctness.
Some steps, such as steps 1–3, are not coded as using gestures because only writing and drawing are used. As mentioned earlier, we did not code writing and drawing as gesturing, as they were coded in their own categories. This PST used writing and drawing first, in combination with his verbal explanation, and then re-explained the written and drawn steps on the ENL using pointing and jump gestures. Step 9, not included in the excerpt in Table 2, is a repetition of the parts of the strategy that were carried out in the previous steps. Here, the PST used verbal communication along with pointing and jump gestures together in one step to communicate the Jump Strategy, shown in Figure 3.
 |
FIGURE 3: Screenshots of step 9 of Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video. |
|
In step 9, Teacher X2 says, ‘So, eighty-three minus u-ten [the number ten], is seventy-three, it’s sixty-three, it’s fifty-three …’. It shows how the gestures of pointing and jump direction can be used in combination with verbal explanation to, firstly, keep track of what is happening during the steps of carrying out the strategy, and secondly, assist with understanding the subtraction operation. Gesturing, therefore, is used for meaning-making and to reduce the cognitive load of having to remember which step or part of the calculation to perform.
Teacher X2, in his micro-teaching video, therefore used visual representations and gestures in a manner highly similar to the baseline demonstration video. This indicates that the PST could appropriately enact these elements embedded in the multimodal communication of the Jump Strategy. The use of such visual representations and gestures is recognised by Vygotsky (1986) as a tool that can mediate learning. The next section discusses the language use by Teacher X2 and instances of translanguaging, which can also be considered part of multimodal communication (Pierson et al. 2021).
Language use in the micro-teaching video
From watching and rewatching the micro-teaching videos in the broader study, we noticed that PSTs used bilingual communication in their explanations of how to solve calculations with the Jump Strategy. As noted, the baseline demonstration video did not include any language other than English, and so PSTs did not have a clear demonstration of how one might use bilingualism or translanguaging in their teaching (other than the Mathematics Teacher Educator [MTE]’s translation of a few key words into isiXhosa, such as ‘-tsiba’, meaning jump).
Of the six PSTs who opted to teach a subtraction example to a learner whose mother tongue is isiXhosa, three used a combination of isiXhosa and English (Teacher X2, Teacher X6, and Teacher X11). The PSTs fluidly moved between these two languages. We noticed that PSTs used a combination of isiXhosa (X) and English (E) words and phrases, as well as loanwords (E→X) from English with isiXhosa language structure (hereafter referred to as ‘loanwords’). We found it useful to code each step in the videos according to these three categories of language use to understand the nature of PSTs’ use of bilingualism in teaching the Jump Strategy. As mentioned earlier, this article focuses on Teacher X2 to allow for an in-depth analysis of the communication strategies.
Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video was divided into 14 steps (steps 1–6 and 14 are given in Table 1 with the language coding for these steps indicated in the right-hand columns). As is evident in Table 1, each step was analysed according to the three categories of language use. Looking at the full micro-teaching video transcript and the full coding of it, we noted that isiXhosa words and phrases appeared the most – 11 times, while English words and phrases and loanwords both appeared 7 times.
Of the 14 steps, three made use of isiXhosa only, one step made use of English only, and none of the steps used loanwords only. Nine steps were a combination of the three categories, and one step involved no verbal explanation. Thus, most of the steps (about 64%) used a combination of categories, implying fluid translanguaging within these steps, while only about 20% used isiXhosa only. A summary of the coding for the full 14 steps is shown in Table 2.
We first discuss language use in terms of number names, and then in the explanation of how to use the Jump Strategy.
Language use for number names
When analysing the language used to name the numbers in the micro-teaching video, we noted that Teacher X2 opted to use English and loanwords. Ten of the 14 steps included number names: six steps used English number names (for example, ‘eighty-three minus thirty-two’ in step 1), and four steps used loanwords for number names (for example, ‘u-fifty-one’ – step 11).
The literature notes a tendency to use English number names rather than isiXhosa number names, suggesting that this may be more familiar to learners who use English or loanwords in everyday communication at home (Booi et al. 2024; Prinsloo & Krause 2019; Van der Walt 2016). Booi et al. (2024) further explain that using English number names when doing mental mathematics calculations, such as the Jump Strategy, may be quicker than the generally longer isiXhosa number names and therefore may support efficient calculations and rapid recall.
Language use for explaining the Jump Strategy
From our coding of the micro-teaching video transcript, it became clear that most of the verbal explanation was done in isiXhosa, including everyday words and phrases to give meaning to the steps and provide context for each action. Step 3, for example, shows the explanation of needing to plot the minuend at the end of the ENL to jump backwards for the subtraction calculation, while using English number names: [Simbeke ngapha lo] [eighty … eighty] [bani?] [Eighty-three,] [simbek’apha.] [We put eighty on this side … eighty what? Eighty-three, we put it here].
The MSAP teacher guide’s scripted lessons use pedagogically informed, everyday key words explaining the Jump Strategy, including phrases such as ‘jump’, ‘forwards’ (for addition) and ‘backwards’ (for subtraction) (Lovemore & Graven 2024). In Teacher X2’s micro-teaching video, three of the key phrases from the scripted lessons are used, and they are all in isiXhosa. Step 2 refers to jumping [‘uk’tsiba’], and step 4 refers to both going forwards [‘besisiyaphambili’] for addition in a previous calculation and to going backwards [‘Sibuy’umva’] in this subtraction calculation.
Coding shows that in this video, the words and phrases related to the more formal mathematics register are all in English or they are loanwords from English with isiXhosa language structure. For example, to indicate the subtraction operation, the English word ‘minus’ and its loanword variations (‘si-minus-a’ [we are subtracting] in step 7 and ‘minus-a’ [minus/subtract] in step 10) are used. There is no use of the isiXhosa more formal term ‘-thabatha’ to indicate subtraction in this micro-teaching video.
Another English phrase used in this video is ‘… is equal to dash’ (step 1), when indicating the difference unknown as the required answer to solve the subtraction calculation. It is a formal mathematical register to refer to equivalence (=) by saying ‘is equal to’. However, ‘dash’ is an informal way of indicating that the difference is unknown and should be filled in. It is interesting that this PST referred to a dash (a blank), as this is often found in primary mathematics worksheets (or the use of an empty square to fill in the answer), but the baseline demonstration video and the mental starter scripted lessons did not use this symbol or language.
Coding further showed that the mathematics register words related to the Jump Strategy were all used as loanwords. Step 2 refers to ‘i-numberline-i’ to indicate drawing a number line, and step 14 explains ‘siyi-break-a-down’ [we break it down], to indicate the breaking up of the number into tens and ones. The loanwords use the English root word but add a prefix and/or suffix to change the word into the isiXhosa structure, similar to the loanword number names. This PST opted not to use the isiXhosa terms ‘umgca manani’ for the number line, and ‘sicalula’ for breaking down a number. Other loanwords in this video were ‘i-Sum’ (step 1) and ‘i-answer’ (step 12).
It is worth noting the use of a single loanword historically from Afrikaans (without the isiXhosa prefix or suffix) in step 6, ‘ne?’. This word, while having an Afrikaans ‘nê’ origin, is used in colloquial language in South Africa to mean ‘do you agree?’.1 The PST used this colloquial word to ask his peer (who was filming the micro-teaching video) for affirmation that he was correct in subtracting 10.
The baseline demonstration video analysis
As mentioned earlier, the baseline demonstration video (accessible through QR code) is in English only, based on the MSAP scripted lessons in the teacher guide. This example does not make use of bilingualism, but the focus is rather on demonstrating the pedagogically powerful multimodal communication. We share and discuss an extract of the baseline demonstration video analysis focusing similarly on the setup part and the conclusion (Steps 1–3, 5 and 15–16) and then use this baseline to examine what gestures, drawings and writing may be absent or different in Teacher X2’s video.
The multimodal elements in this baseline demonstration video (some of which are shown in Table 3) include writing and drawing as visual representations, as well as gestures such as pointing and showing the jumps on the ENL. Examples of writing include the writing of the original calculation (62 – 17), writing ‘62’ on the ENL when saying ‘plot the first number 62’ (step 2), writing the subtraction of ten (−10) above the tens jump (step 5) and writing the final answer as he says ‘is equal to 45’ (step 16). The writing happens while the explanation is being spoken, and the writing supports what is being said. Some steps have no new writing, if the description is based on previous writing (e.g., steps 3 and 15).
Gestures in this baseline demonstration video include, among other examples not included in the table, gesturing the jump direction backwards for subtraction on the ENL (step 2) to support the meaning of the subtraction operation. Pointing is also used to indicate which step of the strategy is being carried out (step 3), where a number comes from (step 5), and where a number is used in the calculation on the ENL (step 15). This may help reduce a learner’s cognitive load when carrying out the steps of the Jump Strategy. Some examples do not include any gesturing (e.g., steps 1 and 16). The gestures support the spoken words of the explanation and the drawing and writing on the ENL.
These multimodal elements of communication help make the Jump Strategy explanation accessible to learners. The use of written (and drawn) visual representations, along with hand movements and pointing, supports the spoken explanation of the strategy.
Comparison of the baseline demonstration video and the pre-service teacher video
A comparison between the coding and analysis of the baseline demonstration video and the PST micro-teaching video suggests that Teacher X2 enacted the Jump Strategy on the ENL using multimodal communication that is closely aligned with the baseline demonstration video (see Table 4). It can be said that the PST enacted the Jump Strategy on the ENL with fidelity (O’Donnell 2008) to the baseline demonstration video.
| TABLE 4: Comparison of the baseline demonstration video and the pre-service teacher micro-teaching video. |
The greatest difference, other than the expected difference in language use and number names, is in relation to the jumps in the category of gesturing. The demonstration video has 6 jumps, while Teacher X2’s video has only one jump gesture. The rest of the table shows a highly similar extent of multimodal aspects in Teacher X2’s video. Relative to the number of steps in each video, the PST used writing and/or drawing to represent jumps on the ENL in a similar way to the demonstration. Gesturing by pointing was similar in the two videos; however, the PST did not enact the gesturing of the jump on the ENL to the same extent that the demonstration video did. This is a potential missed pedagogical opportunity, as gesturing in this example could support the meaning of the jump direction for subtraction. The PST’s micro-teaching video, however, made use of bilingual communication, as opposed to the demonstration video that was only presented in English. The example micro-teaching video by Teacher X2 shows the complex yet fluid way in which PSTs (and in-service teachers) can use bilingual and multimodal communication to make meaning accessible to learners within a bi-/multilingual context.
Discussion
Much research has been carried out in Southern Africa on the MSAP implementation with in-service and PSTs. A common theme among teacher educators on the team is that their students have challenges with translations of teacher guides or with their own translations (discussed in the South African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education [SAARMSTE] 2026 Conference, Symposium by Graven, Venkat & Matthews [2026]). This article offers a methodological option for rigorous coding and analysis of in-service and PST transcripts of their own implementation and for teacher educators to prompt reflection.
The coding and analysis system allowed us to see that the PST enacted the Jump Strategy on the ENL with fidelity when compared with the multimodal elements in the baseline demonstration video. This is encouraging, as O’Donnell (2008) found that higher implementation fidelity resulted in greater effectiveness of an intervention. The PST went beyond the baseline video by using both isiXhosa and English to explain the strategy.
In the example of Teacher X2, number names were either in English or as loanwords. It was interesting to note that the more everyday phrases were in isiXhosa, including pedagogically informed everyday words from the Jump Strategy, whereas the more formal mathematics register words were either in English or were English loanwords with an isiXhosa language structure. Our findings on language coding align with Sapire’s (2021) suggestion that teachers tend to use English more in mathematical phrases than in non-mathematical phrases. The use of English terms and English loanwords suggests PSTs’ preference for words they anticipate will be more familiar to learners, making learning more accessible in a bilingual teaching context, such as MTBBE.
What was useful in this study was the MSAP teacher resources (scripted lessons), including the demonstration video. This meant that the PSTs did not have to spend time planning the number ranges and representations – and were given a clear, live visual unfolding of the pedagogically useful gestures available to support their teaching. As a result, PSTs were able to focus on how they might best use verbal communication and explanation (including bilingualism or multilingualism where they saw this as appropriate) to provide access to meaning-making for their imagined learner. For PSTs, having to plan a teaching episode and the content needed to communicate can be challenging; adding bilingual teaching to this planning can be an additional challenge. We have experienced that being able to provide a scripted lesson starter and a video of the way in which it can ‘best’ be explained using multimodal communication and key representations frees PSTs to focus on how they might translate the English explanations into language(s) that are accessible to their learners.
The in-depth analysis made possible with the developed coding system revealed the rich use of language resources through multimodal and bilingual tools. Planas and Setati-Phakeng (2014) advocate for such enactment of language-as-a-resource for enhancing access to meaning in South African multilingual contexts. The PST even drew on an originally Afrikaans word ‘ne?’ (step 6) for asking a question. The combination of multimodal and bilingual communication in this PST’s micro-teaching video is an example of a more additive approach to bilingual teaching (Robertson & Graven 2020), as the PST made use of the imagined learner’s mother tongue (isiXhosa) and English in combination with multimodal gestures and visuals to promote understanding and access to meaning. This suggests the pedagogical power of fluidly and flexibly translanguaging (verbally) in conjunction with visual representation and gesture, supporting the notion that translanguaging is multimodal, as suggested by authors such as Charamba (2022). This suggests that bilingual education extends beyond simply repeating explanations in multiple languages. Furthermore, sociocultural theory and translanguaging together provided a lens for understanding bilingual mathematics teaching as socially mediated meaning-making that occurs through fluid use of multiple semiotic and linguistic resources.
Some challenges are, however, evident when using this coding system. For example, the use of the word ‘ne?’. As indicated, it was difficult to decide which language the word belongs to and how to code it. While the word has an Afrikaans origin, we opted to code it as a colloquial isiXhosa (X*) use of the word due to the context: the previous words in the sentence are isiXhosa and the predominant language in the micro-teaching video is isiXhosa. However, the Dictionary of South African English (2025b) describes ‘ne’ as an English adoption of the Afrikaans word and notes that it is used across all racial and cultural groups in South Africa, including Black South African English. This raises a question about the authority of the dictionary when categorising a loanword into a specific language (in this case, the Dictionary of South African English, but this is relevant to other dictionaries as well). Further, dictionaries are not static and are constantly updated as languages evolve. We acknowledge that our coding of ‘ne’ as an isiXhosa adoption is debatable, but due to the context of the broader data, we argue that it is the most appropriate for our purpose. A similar example (not from this study) could be the use of ‘aikona’, meaning an emphatic ‘no’ or ‘not any’, originating from the Nguni languages isiXhosa and isiZulu, but used across South African groups (Dictionary of South African English, 2025a).
These examples further highlight that language is fluid, thus aligning with our accepted definition of translanguaging (Charamba 2022; García & Lin 2017; Li 2008), our interpretivist lens, and the role of social context in mediating learning (Vygotsky 1986). This fluidity and acknowledgement that this is an interpretation according to context is what we are proposing is some of the grappling that one must do when analysing bi-/multilingual and multimodal communication in education. We further wonder about the extent to which other South African words (and similar instances in other multilingual and multicultural countries) used across languages and cultural and racial groups need to be considered as words belonging to multiple languages, rather than just the language of origin or English. These debates should take place around translanguaging in our context and influence the complexities of analysing such fluid translanguaging in teaching.
We suggest that such additive models of bilingualism, and viewing language as a resource, can be achieved through explicit instruction on multimodal elements and fluid language use. Analysing of teacher transcripts allows us to identify the elements needed for implementation fidelity of the Jump Strategy. Furthermore, we posit that the coding system used can also be used by teacher educators with in-service teachers during professional development or PSTs during their teacher training. This can initiate reflection and discussion around ways in which learners from diverse language backgrounds may be supported in the context of MTBBE. Teachers can explore where and how visual representations, gestures and language use may best support access to meaning-making for their learners, recognising that this process is fluid and context- and learner-dependent.
We acknowledge, although, that the duration of the mental mathematics lesson starter video analysed in detail in this article was less than 1 min, and that this coding system may not be feasible for full lesson periods. The coding system can, however, be useful for analysing lesson excerpts and, in so doing, providing meaningful examples for discussion and reflection on how multimodal and bilingual teaching of mathematical concepts can support access to meaning. While this article focuses on one PST example micro-teaching video, and no generalisations can be made, this allowed us the space to demonstrate the in-depth analysis possible with such teacher videos and the rich data they can generate for informing researchers, teachers and even task designers in bi-/multilingual spaces.
Conclusion
The aim of this article is to explore how researchers might analyse multimodal, mother-tongue-based bilingual teaching practices to support PSTs’ reflection on their communicative practices when teaching mathematics. Results reveal that the exemplar PST enacted multimodal bilingual teaching of the Jump Strategy using most of the multimodal elements from the baseline video and fluidly moved between isiXhosa, English and loanwords to support learning.
The contribution is methodological, suggesting a coding system for analysis of video-recorded excerpts of teachers’ multimodal and bilingual teaching of mathematics and, in so doing, providing a tool for (in- and pre-service) teacher development, as Prediger (2019) states is required for effective teaching in bi-/multilingual contexts.
Considering the context of MTBBE where teachers need to navigate the complex space of bi- and multilingual classrooms, it is important to consider ways in which PSTs can be prepared to make use of their own diverse multimodal linguistic repertoires (Robertson & Graven 2020). We posit that in-depth analysis (using this coding system) of such exemplar micro-teaching videos can explicitly highlight how a teacher might combine bilingual and multimodal communication and may serve as a starting point to promote reflective discussion for preparing PSTs for mediating learning in their future multilingual classrooms. Further, we believe that the opportunity to compare such brief videos of lesson starters – in terms of multimodal communicative acts – to a baseline exemplar video could assist in supporting learning about and reflecting on translanguaging as a practice that focuses on the communicative function of language for access to meaning-making using all available languages and multimodal resources.
Acknowledgements
Competing interests
The authors reported that they received funding from the National Research Foundation, which may be affected by the research reported in the enclosed publication. The authors have fully disclosed those interests and have implemented an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from their involvement. The terms of these funding arrangements have been reviewed and approved by the affiliated university in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.
CRediT authorship contribution
Tarryn Lovemore: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Mellony Graven: Conceptualisation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Resources, Writing – review & editing. Both authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication, and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.
Funding information
The research is supported by the National Research Foundation (grant number 74658).
Data availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, Tarryn Lovemore.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency, or that of the publisher. The authors are responsible for this article’s results, findings, and content.
References
Bailey, A.L., Abraham, M.E., Dong, J.Y., Torres, I.M., Wang, Y.P., Zamora, E. et al., 2025, ‘Translanguaging: Conceptual underpinnings of equity-oriented instructional and assessment practices with adolescent multilingual learners’, Linguistics and Education 87, 101418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2025.101418
Bobis, J., 2007, ‘The empty number line: A useful tool or just another procedure?’, Teaching Children Mathematics 13(8), 410–413. https://doi.org/10.5951/TCM.13.8.0410
Booi, T., Vale, P. & Graven, M., 2024, ‘Research-informed translation of mental strategy teaching materials into isiXhosa’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 14(1), a1554. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v14i1.1554
Charamba, E., 2022, ‘Pushing linguistic boundaries: Translanguaging in a bilingual Science and Technology classroom’, Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 43(10), 951–965. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1783544
Church, R.B., Ayman-Nolley, S. & Mahootian, S., 2004, ‘The role of gesture in bilingual education: Does gesture enhance learning?’, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 7(4), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050408667815
Coetzer, T., Livingston, C. & Barnard, E., 2023, ‘Using visual representations to enhance isiXhosa home language learners’ mathematical understanding’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 13(1), a1297. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v13i1.1297
Collin, S., Karsenti, T. & Komis, V., 2013, ‘Reflective practice in initial teacher training: Critiques and perspectives’, Reflective Practice 14(1), 104–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2012.732935
Cook, S.W., Friedman, H.S., Duggan, K.A., Cui, J. & Popescu, V., 2017, ‘Hand gesture and mathematics learning: Lessons from an avatar’, Cognitive Science 41(2), 518–535. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12344
Creswell, J.W., 2013, Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches, 3rd edn., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Cummins, J., 2008, ‘BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction’, in N.H. Hornberger (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education, pp. 487–499, Springer, Boston, MA.
Department of Basic Education (DBE), 2011, Curriculum and assessment policy statement: Mathematics intermediate phase Grade 4–6, DBE, Pretoria, viewed 08 February 2026, from https://www.education.gov.za/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=dr7zg3CFCr8%3d&tabid=572&portalid=0&mid=1568&forcedownload=true.
Department of Basic Education (DBE), 2024, South African 2023 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) highlights report, DBE, Pretoria, viewed 08 February 2026, from https://www.education.gov.za/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2024/TIMSS%202024.pdf.
Department of Basic Education (DBE), 2025, Mother tongue-based bilingual education (MTbBE), viewed 12 February 2026, from https://www.education.gov.za/Programmes/MTbBE.aspx.
Department of Education, 1997, Language in education policy, Government Printer, Pretoria.
Dewey, J., 1933, How we think: A restatement of the relations of reflective thinking to the educative process, D.C. Heath and Company, Boston, MA.
Dictionary of South African English (DSAE), 2025a, aikona, Dictionary of South African English [online], English, viewed 13 March 2026, from https://dsae.co.za/entry/aikona/e00153.
Dictionary of South African English (DSAE), 2025b, nê, Dictionary of South African English, viewed 13 March 2026, from https://dsae.co.za/entry/nê/e05118.
Engeström, Y., 2011, ‘From design experiments to formative interventions’, Theory & Psychology 21(5), 598–628. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354311419252
Essien, A.A., 2010, ‘What teacher educators consider as best practices in preparing pre-service teachers for teaching Mathematics in multilingual classrooms’, Perspectives in Education 28(4), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v28i4.52
Essien, A.A., Sapire, I., Tshuma, L., Chikiwa, C. & Takane, T., 2024, ‘Mathematics teacher education in multilingual contexts – Symposium’, in Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education conference, 32nd proceedings, Windhoek, January 16–18.
García, O. & Lin, A.M., 2017, ‘Translanguaging in bilingual education’, in O. García, A. Lin & S. May (eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education, pp. 117–130, Springer, Cham.
Goldin-Meadow, S., Cook, S.W. & Mitchell, Z.A., 2009, ‘Gesturing gives children new ideas about math’, Psychological Science 20(3), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02297.x
Graven, M., Venkat, H. & Matthews, C., 2026, ‘Assessment of mental mathematics strategies and number sense’, in C. Stevenson-Milln (ed.), 34th Annual Conference of the Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Johannesburg, January 19–22.
Graven, M., Venkat, H., Askew, M., Bowie, L., Morrison, S. & Vale, P., 2020, Grade 3 Mathematics Mental Starters Assessment Project (MSAP), viewed 21 January 2026, from https://www.education.gov.za/MSAP2022.aspx.
Guba, E.G., 1981, ‘Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries’, Educational Communication & Technology 29(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02766777
Heugh, K., 2021, ‘Southern multilingualisms, translanguaging and transknowledging in inclusive and sustainable education’, in P. Harding-Esch & H. Coleman (eds.), Language and the sustainable development goals, pp. 37–48, British Council, London.
Karsenty, R. & Arcavi, A., 2017, ‘Mathematics, lenses and videotapes: A framework and a language for developing reflective practices of teaching’, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 20(5), 433–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-017-9379-x
Kasari, G. & Steffensen, L., 2026, ‘Exploring the potential of mathematical modelling for integrating issues about multilingual mathematics classrooms in teacher education’, Mathematics Education Research Journal 38(3):1–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-026-00569-0
Kendon, A., 2000, ‘Language and gesture: Unity or duality?’, in D. McNeill (ed.), Language and gesture, pp. 47–63, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kluyts, M., De Klerk, D., Dlamini, P. & Padayachee, K., 2024, ‘Student perceptions of multilingual learning and teaching in two faculties at a South African university’, African Perspectives of Research in Teaching and Learning Journal 3(8), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.70875/v8i3article11
Li, W., 2018, ‘Translanguaging as a practical theory of language’, Applied Linguistics 39(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx039
Lovemore, T.S. & Graven, M., 2024, ‘Pre-service teachers’ use of the jump strategy on the empty number line for mental computation’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 14(1), a1526. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v14i1.1526
Maxwell, J.A., 2013, A realist approach for qualitative research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Ngidi, S.A. & Mncwango, E.M., 2022, ‘University students’ perspectives on an English-only language policy in higher education’, Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa 18(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v18i1.1189
O’Donnell, C.L., 2008, ‘Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research’, Review of Educational Research 78(1), 33–84. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313793
Olawale, B.E., Hendricks, W. & Rusi, L., 2024, ‘Bilingual teaching in South Africa: A qualitative inquiry into the strategies used for the preparation of mathematics teachers in the foundation phase’, Cogent Education 11(1), 2428884. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2428884
Pacheco, M.B., Smith, B.E., Combs, E. & Amgott, N.A., 2022, ‘Translanguaging within multimodal composition products and processes: A systematic review’, Pedagogies: An International Journal 17(4), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2022.2139256
Pierson, A.E., Clark, D.B. & Brady, C.E., 2021, ‘Scientific modeling and translanguaging: A multilingual and multimodal approach to support science learning and engagement’, Science Education 105(4), 776–813. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21622
Planas, N. & Setati-Phakeng, M., 2014, ‘On the process of gaining language as a resource in mathematics education’, ZDM 46(6), 883–893. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0610-2
Prediger, S., 2019, ‘Investigating and promoting teachers’ expertise for language-responsive mathematics teaching’, Mathematics Education Research Journal 31(4), 367–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00258-1
Prinsloo, M. & Krause, L.S., 2019, ‘Translanguaging, place and complexity’, Language & Education 33(2), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2018.1516778
Rasmussen, C., Stephan, M. & Allen, K., 2004, ‘Classroom mathematical practices and gesturing’, Journal of Mathematical Behavior 23(3), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2004.06.003
Robertson, S-A. & Graven, M., 2020, ‘A mathematics teacher’s response to a dilemma: “I’m supposed to teach them in English but they don’t understand”’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 10(1), a800. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v10i1.800
Robertson, S-A. & Graven, M., 2023, ‘Exploring the implications of the multilingual turn in mathematics education research for South African policy makers, researchers and educators’, in A. Essien (ed.), Multilingualism in the teaching and learning of mathematics in Africa: Issues for mathematics education research, pp. 23–45, Bloomsbury Publishing, London.
Ruíz, R., 1984, ‘Orientations in language planning’, NABE Journal 8(2), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/08855072.1984.10668464
Sapire, I., 2021, ‘Language use in the learning and teaching of early grade mathematics in the context of multilingualism’, Doctoral thesis, viewed 12 February 2026, from https://hdl.handle.net/10539/32906.
Schäfer, M. & Chikiwa, C., 2019, ‘Teachers’ use of verbal language to evoke visualizations in multilingual mathematics classes’, Perspectives in Education 37(2), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.38140/pie.v37i2.4033
Sung, Y., Stephens, A.C., Veltri Torres, R., Strachota, S., Blanton, M., Murphy Gardiner, A. et al., 2025, ‘Teacher use of multimodal signs to support kindergarten students’ developing understanding of mathematical equivalence’, Mathematics Education Research Journal 37(4), 687–708. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00508-x
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., 2008, ‘Learning from “Didactikids”: An impetus for revisiting the empty number line’, Mathematics Education Research Journal 20(3), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217528
Van der Mescht, C.R., 2023, ‘In word and deed: Embodying early literacy learning in gestures and postures’, South African Journal of Childhood Education 13(1), a1280. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v13i1.1280
Van der Walt, C., 2016, ‘Why it makes sense for children to learn in the language they know best’, The Conversation, viewed 12 February 2026, from https://theconversation.com/why-it-makes-sense-for-children-to-learn-in-the-language-they-know-best-55346.
Van der Walt, C. & Ruiters, J., 2012, ‘Every teacher a language teacher? Developing awareness of multilingualism in teacher education’, Journal for Language Teaching 45(2), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.4314/jlt.v45i2.5
Vygotsky, L.S., 1986, Thought and language, A. Kozulin, (ed.), Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, MA.
Willis, J.W., 2007, Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zulu, S. & Brijlall, D., 2024, ‘Exploring preservice teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge for teaching analytical geometry in multilingual classrooms’, Pythagoras (Pretoria, South Africa) 45(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4102/PYTHAGORAS.V45I1.802
Footnote
1. The Dictionary of Southern African English describes the word ‘ne’ originating from Afrikaans as ‘an interrogative particle, ‘isn’t that so?’, ‘not so?’; also used redundantly for emphasis (Dictionary of South African English (DSAE) 2025b).
|
Hide
Show all
Email this article (Login required)
