Original Research

Playing games for early grade mathematical learning in multilingual Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education classrooms

Sihlobosenkosi Mpofu, Ingrid Sapire, Yutao Zhao

Received: 26 Feb. 2026; Accepted: 24 June 2026; Published: 28 Aug. 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Author(s). Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Background: The study investigated how Bala Wande game-based activities shaped Grade 1 students’ participation, language use and mathematical meaning-making within a Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education (MTBBE) context, drawing on video data of teachers using the bilingual Bala Wande intervention programme.

Aim: The aim was to demonstrate how mathematics games strengthen early grade learning within a MTBBE context.

Setting: The dataset comprised 17 classroom videos across three South African provinces of teachers identified as implementing the Bala Wande programme with high fidelity.

Methods: An in-depth secondary analysis was conducted on four episodes of the videos’ mathematics games. The analysis examined teacher control, student participation, and the use of mathematical and linguistic resources to understand how game-based activities created opportunities for structured mathematical and language learning.

Results: Games in MTBBE classrooms are more than motivational tools. They enable students to draw flexibly on more than one language, while engaging in mathematical discourse, negotiating meaning, developing mathematical practices, and gaining confidence in communicating mathematical ideas.

Conclusion: Mathematics games provide structured opportunities for learning and consolidation of mathematical concepts while fostering active participation and multilingual mathematical reasoning and communication, supporting both mathematical and bilingual language development.

Contribution: The study advances multilingual mathematics education, showing how games create socially mediated and linguistically flexible learning opportunities. Using a situated learning perspective, it conceptualises multilingual mathematics learning as participation in social practices and how MTBBE, translanguaging and play-based pedagogy support mathematical understanding and language development.

Keywords: early grade mathematics; multilingual contexts; translanguaging; mathematics games; Mother Tongue-Based Bilingual Education; student participation.

Introduction

The Mother Tongue-based Bilingual Education Programme (MTBBE), recently promulgated in South Africa, brings to the forefront the need for multilingual language practices in classroom instruction. In a country with 12 official languages (including South African Sign Language), the programme represents an important shift from the historically monolingual orientation of Language-in-Education Policy (LIEP) (Department of Education [DoE] 1997). English language was the dominant Language of Teaching and Learning beyond the early grades. Although the LIEP formally recognised multilingualism, it has been criticised for operating with a monolingual bias that limited students’ use of their linguistic repertoires in classroom interactions (Sapire & Essien 2021). Mother Tongue-based Bilingual Education Programme therefore creates opportunities for more inclusive and participatory multilingual pedagogies, while also highlighting the need for linguistically supportive materials and practices.

The study draws on Situated Learning Theory, which conceptualises learning as participation in socially organised activity rather than the transmission of isolated knowledge (Lave & Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998). From this perspective, learning occurs through participation in communities of practice in which students gradually move towards fuller engagement in mathematics discourse and activity. Within multilingual mathematics classrooms, participation is mediated not only through mathematical symbols and representations, but also through students’ full linguistic repertoires, embodied actions, and collaborative interactions. From this perspective, structured classroom games can be understood as participation frameworks that mediate students’ access to mathematical discourse and practices. However, limited research has examined how games function within multilingual mathematics classrooms in relation to language use, student participation, and mathematical meaning-making in the early grades. This study addresses this gap by examining how game-based activities can support students’ participation in multilingual mathematical practices.

Background

The Bala Wande bilingual mathematics materials are educational resources developed by the Funda Wande organisation to support early-grade mathematics learning (Grades R–3) in South Africa. Bala Wande, meaning ‘Let’s count’ in isiXhosa, was developed prior to the rollout of MTBBE. A key feature of the materials is the bilingual design, which supports translanguaging and code-switching, allowing students to engage in mathematics in both their mother tongue and English, which aligns with the narrative of MTBBE. The materials provide instruction in both the students’ home languages and English to support conceptual understanding while also developing students’ mathematical language for later grades. This approach aligns with the goals of MTBBE, which promotes multilingual classroom practices and broader access to learning. By providing opportunities for students and teachers to participate in mathematics conversations using their full language repertoire in multilingual classrooms, the Bala Wande programme supports more flexible participation and communication with the potential for enhancing mathematical meaning-making.

South Africa continues to face persistent challenges in mathematics learning, particularly in early mathematics, where many students struggle to develop number sense and basic mathematical reasoning. Research indicates that a significant number of students in Grades 1–3 in South Africa struggle to develop number sense, with only about 16% of the students meeting the curriculum standards (Spaull & Kotze 2015). This means that over 84% of the students at the end of the phase will not be ready for the next phase. These challenges are compounded by linguistic inequalities in classrooms where students often encounter mathematics through a language that differs from their home language. While the Annual National Assessments had indicated an improvement in Grade 1–3 results between 2011 and 2014 (Statistics South Africa 2016), research has shown that the situation has returned to where only 28% of the students scored at least 50% marks (Spaull 2015). Bala Wande aims to strengthen early grade numeracy by aligning with the national curriculum while reflecting local linguistic and cultural contexts. According to Taylor (2021), the Bala Wande materials are structured to build number sense progressively and are particularly effective in low-resource, multilingual classrooms, where language can often be a barrier to understanding mathematics.

Drawing on a situated learning lens helps explain why games may be pedagogically significant within multilingual MTBBE classrooms. Games are not viewed simply as motivational tools or supplementary activities; rather, they function as structured participation spaces that organise interaction, support collaborative meaning-making and create opportunities for students to engage in mathematical discourse in low-risk environments. Research indicates that mathematical games enhance engagement, student motivation and conceptual understanding (Boaler 2016; Bragg 2012). Gee (2007) argues that well-designed educational games create meaningful learning environments in which students actively explore mathematical ideas, test strategies and learn through participation in interactive and dynamic ways. Although research on game-based learning and multilingual education exists independently, there remains limited research on how structured educational games operate within MTBBE mathematics classrooms. In particular, not much has been investigated on how games mediate student participation, language use, and mathematical meaning-making in bilingual classroom settings. Existing studies tend to focus either on mathematical achievement or language policy implementation, with less attention given to the participatory nature of multilingual mathematical activity. Consequently, the relationship between bilingual resources, classroom discourse, and game-based participation remains insufficiently explored. It is within this gap that the present study is located.

Literature review

There has been a recent resurgence of the integration of games into the teaching and learning of mathematics in the early grades because of their potential to enhance conceptual understanding, motivation, and collaborative learning among young students (Debrenti 2024). Mathematical game-based learning in the early grades provides an interactive environment where students can develop mathematical thinking through exploration and play (Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen & Drijvers 2020). Studies have shown that playing games in learning mathematics fosters cognitive development by allowing students to experiment with mathematical ideas in a non-threatening, engaging context (Ramani & Siegler 2008).

Games in education

Game-based learning is recognised as one of the most innovative pedagogical approaches that supports engagement, participation, and meaning-making in classroom contexts (Priyaadharshini et al. 2020). Originating in the 1950s, game-based learning typically integrates educational content within a game framework, facilitating active interaction among students and their peers. Games in education promote active learning and collaboration in both classroom instruction and self-directed learning (Terrell 2016). Contemporary education research positions games not merely as recreational activities but as socially organised learning environments in which students actively construct knowledge through interaction, experimentation and participation (Pan, Ke & Xu 2022). From a situated learning perspective, games are seen as creating a community of practice in which students engage in shared activities, negotiate meanings, and gradually develop competence (Lave & Wenger 1991).

Research consistently shows that games can increase student motivation, engagement, and opportunities for interaction (Debrenti 2024). Educational games often provide low-risk environments where students can test ideas, make errors, receive feedback, and collaboratively solve problems. Gee (2007) argues that well-designed games support learning because they encourage active participation, problem-solving, identity formation and situated meaning-making. Similarly, Pan et al. (2022) found that game-based learning environments can enhance conceptual understanding when students engage collaboratively with meaningful tasks. Recent systematic reviews further indicate that when games are designed around exploratory and student-centred pedagogies rather than rote instruction, they support cognitive outcomes and student participation.

Situated learning theory provides an important lens for understanding why games may be educationally effective. According to Lave and Wenger (1991), learning occurs through participation in social practice. Games create structured opportunities for students to participate in shared activities where knowledge is mediated through interaction, tools, discourse, and collaboration. A situated learning perspective conceptualises games as participation structures through which students engage in authentic forms of social and cognitive practices.

Games in the teaching and learning of mathematics

Over the past decade, mathematics games have garnered the interest of researchers due to their capacity to enhance students’ motivation and engagement (Videnovik et al. 2023). Research in mathematics education suggests games can support the development of mathematical reasoning, communication, conceptual understanding, and positive student disposition towards mathematics. Pan et al. (2022) found that contextualisation, representation, and simulation were important gaming elements that facilitate students’ mathematics learning. Mathematical games provide opportunities for students to engage with concepts through repeated interaction, exploration and discussion rather than memorisation alone (Boaler 2016). In early grade mathematics classrooms, games frequently support counting, number recognition, additive reasoning and problem-solving through embodied and visual forms of participation.

Recent research indicates that mathematics games have demonstrated efficacy as a robust instructional approach to maintain students’ engagement and address their varied conceptual needs (Jutin & Maat 2024). A significant benefit of games in mathematics is the facilitation of active learning, which motivates students to engage in experiential learning (Pardede & Listiani 2024). Rather than adhering to teachers’ directives, students may actively participate in the game, engage in discussions with peers, and accomplish tasks, enjoying a practical experience. Another significant attribute of playing games within mathematics learning environments is their capacity for immediate feedback (Hattie & Timperley 2007) and their capacity to allow effective identification and resolution of students’ confusion and misunderstandings. Game-based learning functions as a pedagogical instrument and enhances students’ social learning and collaboration in mathematics classrooms, where learning is mediated through peer interaction (Vygotsky 1978). Games enable students to collaborate in pairs or groups to address tasks, necessitating them to describe, explain, justify, conjecture, and refute (Barwell 2003), all of which are essential to mathematical reasoning.

Research also suggests that the pedagogical value of games depends on how participation is organised. Pan et al. (2022) note that some mathematical games emphasise factual recall and procedural repetition, while others create opportunities for conceptual reasoning and exploratory learning. From a situated learning perspective, mathematical understanding develops through participation in mathematical practices. Mathematical games become important because they structure interaction around counting, explaining, negotiating strategies, making predictions, and collectively solving problems. Recent studies further demonstrate that collaborative game formats can increase mathematical reasoning and student interaction. Klooger, Russo and Kalogeropoulos (2026) found that paired and collaborative mathematical games generated greater opportunities for explanation, justification, prompting and collective reasoning than competitive individual formats. These findings align with situated learning perspectives that emphasise participation, interaction and shared meaning-making as central to learning.

In early grade mathematics, learning through mathematics games aligns with constructivist theories, particularly situated learning, where knowledge is built through active participation. Games provide students with an opportunity to do mathematics while collaborating with others. According to Baroody (1987), when students are engaged in meaningful play, they are more likely to internalise mathematical concepts. Moreover, using physical and digital games in the early grades has improved fluency in arithmetic, pattern recognition, and spatial reasoning (Sriraman & Lesh 2006).

Despite growing research on mathematical games, much of the literature focuses on achievement outcomes or digital game environments with less attention paid to classroom discourse, participation structures, and multilingual interaction during gameplay in early grade classrooms.

Games in bilingual mathematics education

Several studies have highlighted the positive outcomes of combining bilingual materials with interactive learning approaches. Bilingual education, particularly in mathematics, plays a crucial role in students’ conceptual access and cognitive development (Barwell 2009). Language plays a central role in mathematics learning because mathematical meaning is constructed through interaction and communication. Students draw on multiple linguistic and semiotic resources to participate in mathematical activity (Moschkovich 2002). Rather than viewing multilingualism as a deficit, contemporary perspectives emphasise students’ full linguistic repertoires as resources for meaning-making and participation. The Bala Wande bilingual games help students to develop a richer and more flexible mathematical language (Venkat & Morrison 2023). Furthermore, using more than one language promotes deeper mathematical reasoning processes and diverse approaches to solving problems in mathematics while playing games.

Multilingual mathematics classrooms are characterised by interaction, discussion, visual mediation and translanguaging practices that support mathematical understanding. Sharma and Sharma (2023) identified multilingual practices, bilingual approaches and cognitively focused interventions as important for supporting mathematics learning. Similarly, Maree (2021) showed that multilingual students develop mathematical reasoning more effectively when learning activities include mediating tools, collaborative interaction and opportunities for code-switching. This philosophy underpins the Bala Wande materials, which offer bilingual resources (with English in parallel text to the other official South African languages) designed to support mathematical learning in the early grades. This aligns with MTBBE and is supported by the Bala Wande programme, which supports the transition to mathematics learning beyond the early grades.

The intersection of bilingual instruction and game-based learning is particularly powerful in bilingual classrooms. According to Rubio et al. (2026), using the student’s home language alongside mathematical language helps bridge abstract mathematical concepts. Games serve as a vehicle for students to switch codes naturally while engaging in collaborative problem-solving, promoting both language development and mathematical reasoning. The Bala Wande materials thus represent a pedagogically sound resource that supports learning through play while affirming linguistic identity.

From a situated learning perspective, bilingual mathematics classrooms can be understood as communities of practice where students participate through multiple languages, gestures, visual representations, and interactional routines. Moschkovich (2002) argues that bilingual students’ competence should be understood in relation to participation in mathematical practices rather than only mastery of formal vocabulary. Games may be important in bilingual mathematics because they create structured socially interactive environments.

Rationale and research questions

While there is growing recognition of the value of bilingual instruction and game-based learning in early mathematics education, there remains limited research on the integration of these two approaches, particularly in the South African context. Most existing studies tend to focus either on bilingual education or game-based learning as separate strategies, with few exploring how bilingual materials can be effectively incorporated into game-based learning environments for early grade students. The Bala Wande material bridges the gap between bilingual materials and play-based pedagogies. There is scant research examining how such bilingual content could be adapted into interactive, game-based formats that align with young students’ developmental needs and learning styles. The literature reviewed above provides evidence that game-based learning can enhance engagement and conceptual understanding in mathematics, but how such benefits manifest when games are delivered in multiple languages remains largely unknown. This study addresses this gap by examining how Grade 1 students participate in bilingual game-based mathematical activities using the Bala Wande materials. Using situated learning theory as a conceptual lens, the study investigates how games organise participation, support interaction and mediate mathematical meaning-making within multilingual classroom practices. We explore the following research questions:

• How do games create opportunities for engagement and learning in multilingual mathematics contexts?
• How do students and teachers use language during mathematical game activities to support mathematical meaning-making?
• How do game-based activities from the Bala Wande materials influence student participation in Grade 1 mathematics classrooms?

The findings from this study have important implications for MTBBE in early grade mathematics classrooms. The study contributes evidence on how students draw on their linguistic resources to construct mathematical meaning. Game-based activities support mathematical learning, participation, and language use. Understanding the ways in which teachers and students use multiple languages during mathematical gameplay can inform the design of MTBBE pedagogies that promote both conceptual understanding and language development. Furthermore, insights into the use of Bala Wande game materials may assist curriculum developers, teachers, and policymakers in developing effective strategies for using language as a valuable resource. Ultimately, the study has the potential to support the successful implementation of MTBBE by highlighting practices that foster engagement, participation and meaningful mathematical discourse in multilingual classrooms.

Research methods and design

The dataset used for reporting in this chapter was drawn from a set of 17 videos of teachers across three provinces. The videos were initially collected to investigate programme implementation by high-fidelity teachers more broadly. These teachers were identified by coaches in the field to be implementing the programme effectively, and hence videos of their teaching would allow greater insight into meaningful programme take-up. All videos were transcribed verbatim in the original Sepedi or isiXhosa, and transcriptions were versioned into English. Purposive sampling was used to select episodes from the videos which had complete recordings capturing students engaged in mathematical games (Patton 2015). Such sampling is appropriate in qualitative inquiry where case selection is guided by relevance to the research phenomenon rather than statistical representation (Creswell & Poth 2018). Four videos satisfied the requirements for episode selection. The remaining 13 videos lacked usable gameplay recordings and were therefore excluded from the study.

The selected episodes were analysed to examine how learning through play supported mathematical engagement and meaning-making in a multilingual context. The analysis adopted a qualitative, interpretive approach, allowing close attention to students’ verbal and non-verbal interactions during game-based activities. Video data are particularly valuable in educational research because they capture the complexity of classroom interactions, including gestures, language use, participation patterns, and collaborative meaning-making that may not be evident through field notes or test data alone (Jewitt 2012). An interpretive qualitative approach enabled the researchers to examine how students negotiated mathematical ideas, communicated strategies, and engaged with peers within socially and linguistically diverse classroom environments (Cohen, Manion & Morrison 2018). The use of video analysis was therefore appropriate for exploring the multimodal and interactional dimensions of learning through play in multilingual mathematics classrooms.

The transcripts of the selected episodes were coded inductively to identify recurring patterns related to participation, reasoning, and collaboration. Codes included student vocalisation, peer support, teacher actions, language use, and engagement with mathematical representations (e.g. counters, number cards, number lines). An iterative constant-comparative process was used, involving repeated viewing of video data to refine initial open codes into broader analytical categories capturing how play-based activities mediated mathematical learning opportunities and participation structures. This iterative approach strengthened analytic sensitivity to both recurring patterns and contextual variation (Miles, Huberman & Saldaña 2020). To enhance rigour and transparency, all coding decisions and category refinements were documented through analytic memos and sustained team discussions. Attention was also given to negative cases and divergent patterns to support credibility and reduce selective interpretation (Nowell et al. 2017).

In multilingual settings, instances of code-switching and translanguaging were explicitly identified to examine how students and teachers drew on multiple linguistic resources for meaning-making in mathematics. This framing treats multilingual practices as resourceful rather than deficit-based (Moschkovich 2015). Non-verbal communication, including pointing, counting gestures, gaze, body orientation, and manipulation of materials, was analysed alongside talk to capture multimodal meaning-making during gameplay. This enabled a more complete account of embodied and material mathematical reasoning (ed. Jewitt 2014).

The selected episodes were analysed using a qualitative, interpretive case study design, consistent with approaches that emphasise meaning-making in naturalistic classroom settings (Creswell & Poth 2018). A structured analytic framework was used to examine: (1) classroom activity during gameplay; (2) levels of student independence; and (3) the extent and quality of student talk during mathematical activity. In addition, a translanguaging lens was applied to capture how students and teachers drew on their full linguistic repertoires during interaction (Moschkovich 2015). This enabled attention to both mathematical participation and language use as integrated processes. The analysis focused on interaction patterns, participation structures, and support mechanisms to understand how games mediated mathematical engagement in Grade 1 bilingual classrooms.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the Commerce Research Ethics, University of Cape Town (No. REC 2020/11/002). Written informed consent was obtained from all individual participants involved in the study.

Results

Presentation of episodes

We present excerpts from the four sample episodes that are most pertinent to the analysis, due to space constraints. The analysis focused not only on what students and teachers said but also on how mathematics was mediated through bilingual practices, repetition, gestures, visual representations, and participation pattern practices. We examined the episodes comparatively across four dimensions: (1) mathematical focus; (2) student participation and independence; (3) mediational tools; and (4) teacher control and interactional structure. The comparative approach resulted in the identification of recurring pedagogical patterns and differences in how games supported mathematical engagement and meaning-making in bilingual contexts.

The analysis draws on situated learning theory by Lave and Wenger (1991) because games create social participation in mathematical practices. Students are learning mathematics through participation in classroom activity, interaction, language use, routines, gestures, and shared problem-solving. Comparisons across the four episodes are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 illustrates how mathematical learning across the four episodes can be understood as participation in socially organised classroom practices rather than as the acquisition of isolated mathematical skills. From a Situated Learning perspective, students developed mathematical understanding through engagement in shared activities mediated by interaction, language, gestures, and material artefacts (Lave & Wenger 1991).

In LP2, students participated in a structured doubling routine where oral repetition, finger representations, and teacher-guided turn-taking apprenticed them into the discourse of additive equivalence. Although the teacher retained interactional control, students actively participated by generating numbers and publicly performing doubling strategies. In W1, subtraction learning was situated within embodied classroom activity through gestures, counters, and everyday language such as ‘throw away’ and ‘remove’. These mediational tools enabled students to connect informal experiences to formal mathematical meanings.

LP7 demonstrates how games also induct students into the social norms of school mathematics. Participation centred less on conceptual reasoning and more on learning rules, turn-taking, and collective classroom behaviour, reflecting students’ gradual movement into accepted forms of participation within the classroom community of practice. In contrast, LP8 provided richer opportunities for collaborative meaning-making. Students collectively negotiated errors, used physical representations, and publicly justified answers, allowing mathematical reasoning to become visible within the group. Here, the incorrect response 9 + 9 = 17 functioned as a shared instructional resource through which students engaged in collective verification and problem-solving.

Across the episodes, student agency varied according to the degree of teacher regulation and the opportunities available for students to contribute to mathematical activity. The analysis therefore suggests that games functioned as situated pedagogical spaces where students participated in mathematical practices through interaction with peers, teachers, language, gestures, and artefacts.

In the first episode shown in Table 2, the game creates a participatory routine where interaction occurs while playing a doubling game. In this episode, students are inducted into the discourse of additive reasoning through repetition and turn-taking.

In this episode, the doubling game illustrates how students develop mathematical understanding through participating in a socially organised classroom (Lave & Wenger 1991). They appear confident and exhibit independence, coming up with numbers that should be doubled by their peers, indicating their participation in practice through this routine of doubling. The respondents in the game are able to double the numbers, indicating that they understand the meaning of the word and are participating legitimately. Although the game is teacher-guided through rule setting, turn allocation and response validation, students participate legitimately by generating numbers, verbally expressing doubles and engaging in shared mathematical routines. Repeated statements such as ‘4 doubled is 8’ stabilise the doubling discourse. The discourse initiates the apprentice students into conventional mathematics language practices while fingers function as mediational tools linking gesture, quantity, and spoken number words. The episode therefore demonstrates how mathematical meaning is co-constructed through interaction, repetition, and participation in collective classroom activity (Gee 2007). Students developed understanding of doubling through participation in a structured communal routine where gesture, oral repetition, and peer response supported the co-construction of meaning.

In the second episode shown in Table 3, the teacher is playing a game with the students that involves subtraction.

The interaction in this episode illustrates how mathematical meaning is co-constructed through social participation and embodied classroom activity, consistent with a situated learning perspective (Lave & Wenger 1991). Rather than introducing subtraction as an abstract symbolic procedure, the teacher situates the concept within a familiar physical action by gesturing ‘throwing away’ while repeatedly asking students to interpret the action. Students respond collectively with ‘You remove’ and later ‘We take away’, demonstrating that understanding emerges through participation in shared discourse and activity. The teacher’s repeated questioning functions as scaffolding that guides students towards conventional mathematical language (Vygotsky 1978). The use of gesture alongside verbal interaction also supports meaning-making by linking bodily action to mathematical concepts, helping students connect everyday experiences with formal subtraction language (Moschkovich 2015). From a situated lens, subtraction learning is therefore not merely the acquisition of procedures, but participation in socially mediated mathematical practices within the classroom community.

In the third episode shown in Table 4, the teacher plays a game with the students to practice number recognition.

Viewed through a situated learning lens, the episode illustrates how mathematical understanding develops through participation in socially organised classroom activity rather than through isolated individual performance. Students engage in number recognition within the shared cultural practice of the game, where meaning is constructed through interaction, repetition, and collective participation (Lave & Wenger 1991). The teacher’s questioning (‘What do you say?’ and ‘After what happens?’) functions as scaffolding that guides students towards understanding both the procedural and social rules of the activity. The collective response of the students (‘BINGO!!’) and the accompanying clapping demonstrate how learning is embedded within communal engagement and shared routines. Such interaction positions students as active participants in a community of practice, where mathematical participation is supported through dialogue, imitation, and group affirmation. The game context therefore mediates both cognitive and social learning, enabling students to connect number recognition with meaningful participation in classroom practices (Vygotsky 1978).

In the fourth episode shown in Table 5, the teacher is playing a game with the students that involves building numbers using blocks.

Viewed through a situated learning lens, the episode illustrates how mathematical understanding emerged through participation in a socially organised classroom activity rather than through individual recall alone. The teacher positioned students as active contributors by inviting them to evaluate a peer’s claim that ‘9 and 9 make 17’ and justify their reasoning through counting. Students engaged collaboratively in the activity, with Tebogo physically representing the numbers using fingers while the other students collectively monitored and validated the counting process. This reflects the situated perspective that learning is constructed through interaction, participation, and engagement in shared practices (Lave & Wenger 1991). The teacher’s guidance, questioning, and regulation of participation (‘Tebogo is helping you’) also functioned as scaffolding that supported students’ movement towards more accurate mathematical reasoning, consistent with sociocultural views of learning (Vygotsky 1978). The episode demonstrates how mathematical meaning-making was mediated through embodied activity, peer interaction, oral participation, and classroom norms, enabling students to negotiate and correct misconceptions collaboratively.

Presentation of analysis

We analysed the sample episodes using a qualitative, interpretive case study design consistent with approaches that emphasise meaning-making in a naturalist classroom setting (Creswell & Poth 2018). The analysis was informed by Situated Learning Theory, which conceptualises learning as participation in socially organised activity (Lave & Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998) posit that knowledge develops through interaction, engagement with tools and participation within communities of practice. Mathematics games were examined as social participation spaces in which both students and teachers negotiated mathematical meanings, authority and ways of participating in mathematics. We highlight opportunities and enactments of teachers and students interacting while playing games in the multilingual context to inform our analysis of the potential of games in MTBBE classrooms. The connections between the findings and their implications for MTBBE are demonstrated in the discussion that follows this presentation.

When students are more ‘independent’, does this correspond to increased participation in mathematical practice?

From a situated learning perspective, learning is increased participation in social practices of the community rather than simple acquisition of knowledge individually (Lave & Wenger 1991). Our analysis here focused on how games created opportunities for students to participate in mathematical activity, negotiate meaning, and contribute to the shared practices in the classroom. We examined who performed and regulated procedures, the opportunities to explain and justify ideas, how mathematical meanings were negotiated, and whose voice carried weight.

Across the four classrooms, increased behaviour did not necessarily correspond to increased participation in mathematical meaning-making. Our focus was not whether students acted independently but whether they were given opportunities to engage in mathematical practices, that is, explain their reasoning, evaluate solutions, respond to their peers and collectively construct mathematical understanding. In three classrooms (LP2, W1 and LP7), participation remained largely teacher-centred. This limited opportunities for students to move beyond merely responding to questions towards fuller mathematical conversations. However, in LP8 we observed that opportunities for shared participation and meaning-making among students began to emerge.

The results showed that in LP2 students’ independence was limited. It was confined to answering rather than reasoning about doubling. Student participation was limited because they did not choose the numbers they worked with, explain how they obtained their answers, or get challenged to extend their contributions. Opportunities for fuller participation could have been strengthened if students had been encouraged to pose their own doubling problems, explain their strategies, or support one another in checking their solutions. In spite of this, the game provided a structured context within which students could participate in mathematical activity and become familiar with the language and routines of doubling. In W1, students were given opportunities to place counters, raise cards or do individual counting. Through these actions, they participated physically in the activity. However, meaning-making was constrained when the teacher corrected errors publicly and immediately. Although the teacher’s action prevented entrenchment of misconceptions, allowing for more engagement would have given students more opportunities for meaning-making. Student engagement among themselves supports movement towards fuller participation in the practices of the classroom community (Wenger 1998). LP8 exhibited a more emerging discursive agency towards explorative discourse. A student articulated, ‘I have 9 fingers and Student X also has 9 fingers…’. Doubling by this student is re-described relationally, exhibiting discursive appropriation. The teacher allowed students to count aloud without immediate correction, allowing routine stabilisation through participation. The teacher also invited students to give their views on the validation of answers when she asked, ‘Do you agree with her?’ While this question could be answered by a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response, the question gave students a chance to review the response and justify their decision. The authority is redistributed to the whole community. Although here the teacher still frames authority, endorsement began to circulate among students and contributed to the development of mathematical meaning-making. In this classroom, learning was visible through increased participation in the collective practices of mathematics.

What makes a difference in the learning of mathematics is not whether students act alone but whether they manage to produce mathematical narratives, justify their responses and actions, participate in the endorsement of mathematical narratives, and regulate how they adapt the games they play in the classroom. Three episodes (LP2, W1, LP7) were dominated by teacher-authored mathematical discourse, which inhibited mathematical concept development. In contrast, in LP8, endorsement began to be centralised and conceptual development of the concept of doubling was enabled through the discursive moves.

How vocal are the students?

When students are playing free games, there is an expectation that they will talk and use their talk to discuss, justify, and reason about their mathematical actions. From a situated learning perspective, talk is more than just a means of communicating but a way of participating in the community of mathematicians. While students were observed to be vocal, the nature of their participation differed considerably.

In LP2, students were vocally responsive but had limited opportunities to participate meaningfully in mathematical discussions. The evidence shows that they produced verbal responses, but their utterances were short, elicited by the teacher and formula-based. The mathematical vocabulary used by students was correct; they spoke only in response to the teacher’s prompts. Students’ talk was structurally predictable, showing a strong Initiation-Response-Evaluation (IRE) pattern. From a situated learning perspective, students participated in the practice but had limited opportunities to influence it. Therefore, students were vocal within tightly regulated discursive boundaries. Participation reflects that the classroom activity was more about procedural alignment.

Similarly, students in W1 participated actively through frequent vocal chorus responses, and single-word confirmations such as, ‘seven’ and ‘five’. Students also echoed the teacher’s language of words such as ‘remove’ and ‘take away’. The teacher controlled the narratives, evidenced by limited peer negotiation and student confirmation of the correctness of responses rather than constructed explanations. In this episode, the game gave students chances to have their voices heard in the classroom, but it created opportunities for participation; students’ involvement remained focused on following established routines rather than jointly constructing mathematical understanding.

Student voices were also constrained by teacher control in LP7. Students did not use many words except for the chorus ‘Yes’ and single-number responses. The teacher was dominant as she determined which narratives were legitimate. Students were positioned as responders, and not proposers, and opportunities to influence the direction of mathematical discussion were limited. While students were vocal, their talk did not shape the mathematical discourse. The game gave students opportunities to vocalise their thoughts, but these opportunities were not fully leveraged to support collaborative learning.

LP8 had the highest vocal participation and collaborative engagement. Students could be heard counting aloud and having a public disagreement with a big ‘No’! They used words like ‘equal’, ‘same’, and ‘double’ that strengthened their mathematical talk. The teacher allowed and normalised participation, including the right to engage with incorrect responses. The teacher made sure that speaking was socially safe. Hence, participation moved beyond just responding to the teacher. Students were confident speakers, although they were not yet fully independent in talking about mathematical ideas. From a situated learning perspective, learners in LP8 were moving beyond peripheral participation towards more active involvement in the classroom community, as they increasingly took responsibility for explaining, evaluating, and discussing mathematical ideas.

Across the four classrooms, the findings suggest that vocal participation alone does not necessarily indicate meaningful engagement in mathematical learning. Situated learning theory highlights that learning occurs through participation in shared practices rather than through individual action alone (Lave & Wenger 1991). The key difference across the episodes was not the amount of student talk but the extent to which learners were positioned as legitimate contributors to mathematical activity. In LP2, W1, and LP7, participation remained largely teacher-regulated, limiting opportunities for learners to engage collaboratively with mathematical ideas. In contrast, LP8 provided greater opportunities for students to participate in the collective construction and evaluation of mathematical meaning. The findings therefore suggest that mathematics games can create valuable opportunities for participation, but their learning potential depends on how teachers structure interactions and distribute opportunities for engagement within the classroom community.

Do the games provide a powerful space for peer learning and teaching?

From the situated learning perspective, games create communities of practice in which mathematical meaning-making develops through peer participation, shared tools, and classroom routines rather than through individual performance alone (Lave & Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998). There is evidence that students can benefit from the mathematical games because they are structurally designed to create opportunities for collaborative learning. These opportunities were not fully utilised by the teachers, as they seemed to hold authority and control of what happened during the games instead of allowing students to engage in free play. Students thus participated more as respondents rather than as co-constructors of mathematical meaning. This does not mean that teachers should not show students how games should be played, but they should release control so that games can become spaces for peer learning and teaching. When authority was distributed more evenly, we observed more negotiation on mathematical meaning, justified strategies, and support for one another.

Free games are a good ground for peer-mediated sense-making. It was not clear in the episodes why most of the games were done at a class level, and there was no opportunity to interview teachers to discuss this choice. It could be that the games we observed were not played in the way teachers generally play games with their students. Games played at a small-group level allow increased individual participation and talk about mathematical objects, allowing students to explore, justify and reason about their mathematical actions.

The students in LP2 had the opportunity to use the game as a space for peer teaching and learning. Instead of the teacher saying, ‘Double these numbers in your groups’, she was heard saying, ‘Now, I’m going to be the one doubling…’. The authority remained with the teacher; students only validated what the teacher endorsed. The teacher’s statement further endorses that students’ voices are only valid when the teacher accepts them or if she revoices them. Under such circumstances, it is difficult for peer endorsement or challenges to emerge. The evidence here shows that teacher control in mathematics games constrains peer interaction, limiting opportunities for legitimate participation and resulting in transmission-oriented interaction patterns in which peer endorsement and challenge were largely absent.

The setting in W1 where students faced each other and compared card numbers allowed for peer learning and teaching. Shared tasks create the potential for horizontal discourse, that is, peer-mediated sense-making and collaborative problem-solving (Vygotsky 1978). There was a time when students compared their results, saying, ‘If yours and mine are the same’. The potential was there for students to use the cards in front of them. This could have created opportunities for students to generate new narratives that could be endorsed. However, the teacher kept control of what was happening by frequent interruption, revoicing answers instead of letting peers respond, and discouraging student-to-student talk, instructing, ‘Don’t talk to each other’. The teacher lost an opportunity to let students talk and learn from each other by not allowing legitimate peer explanations, as authoritative validation only came from the teacher. The game in this episode created a physical proximity and potential for shared tasks that allowed students to use both their mother tongue and English language in their learning of mathematics, but the classroom situation did not take advantage of the opportunity for sustained peer-to-peer mathematical dialogue.

The game played by the students in LP7 saw partners exchange information about numbers and confirm the correctness of their responses, telling each other which number was pointed to and checking their cards. The game had the potential to create situations where students could learn and create mathematical learning moments and collaborative meaning-making. As alluded to in most of the paragraphs above, what undermines peer learning is that the teacher frequently overrides peer interaction and re-explains instead of allowing students to explain their reasoning to each other. The teacher also interrupted in order to correct rather than observe and let students work their way out of those situations through the tools in their possession. The teacher missed some peer-learning opportunities. For example, a point of disagreement presented itself when one student said, ‘He says he pointed to 77’. This could have opened a discussion where students could verify strategies and at least produce new strategies and mathematical meaning. The game thus created a space for peer learning, but that space was not fully taken up. For situated learning, this was a missed opportunity for students to self-regulate mathematical activity and develop norms for verifying claims within a group.

The teacher and students in LP8 illustrated how games can support peer learning as a form of situated participation. From LP8, there is strong evidence of peer interaction as observed when student A corrected an error from another student B, by recounting publicly. The error became a shared object of learning, not an individual failure. Responses were not correct because the teacher said so, but students were given an opportunity to check if their thinking was correct and identify the errors themselves. The teacher positioned peers as legitimate contributors when she invited them to make contributions. She invited students to participate by asking questions such as: ‘Who can count them for us?’ Authority for evaluating ideas began to circulate among students, creating richer spaces for participation, explanation and collective sense-making.

Across the episodes, the games themselves provided shared tasks, common artefacts, and opportunities for interaction, which are very important for learning within communities of practice (Lave & Wenger 1991; Wenger 1998). The key difference was not whether a game was present but how participation was organised. The evidence shows that teacher action could restrict or expand students’ opportunities to engage in peer-supported reasoning. Where participation was more distributed, students were more likely to explain, justify, challenge and refine mathematical ideas. This suggests that games have the potential to become powerful spaces for collaborative participation.

Bilingualism classroom lens

Finally, we consider ways in which the bilingual Bala Wande material, as used by the teachers, was used to create mathematical meaning. In LP2, LP7 and LP8, Sepedi was the language of learning and teaching, while in W1 it was isiXhosa. As mentioned, the Bala Wande materials are bilingual, which facilitates fluid movement between languages in multilingual settings for both teachers and students. From a situated learning perspective, language is not merely a vehicle for communicating mathematical ideas but a resource for participating in communities of practice (Lave & Wenger 1991). Learning occurs through participation in shared activities, and language is a key resource. Bilingualism becomes an added resource. Across the episodes, learners used both English and their home language, reflecting their emerging participation in mathematical communities.

In LP2, the teacher used short, repetitive, and rhythmical utterances such as ‘8 doubled is 16’ and ‘Aha!’, using language to support students’ development of mathematical meaning. Students used fingers as representations of numbers, reducing the linguistic load. The teacher also employed limited elaboration when she said ‘6 doubled is 12’, suggesting that students were engaged in safe, rehearsed mathematical talk, which minimises linguistic risk.

The teacher at W1 used a lot of repetition and revoicing to ensure that students participated in the mathematics community through the game. This suggests that for the teacher, language accuracy was as important as mathematical accuracy. Students, on their part, used a lot of gestures, pointing and enactment to compensate for their limited linguistic resources without hampering conceptual development. We also observed that physical actions like throwing away and stepping back helped create meaning beyond just language. While the episode was set in an isiXhosa home language class, the teacher heavily relied on formulaic English phrases, which helped support the home language, that is, the language of learning and teaching. The act of freely using two languages gives students more opportunities to participate fully in a lesson, and allowing chorus responses reduces their anxiety.

In LP7, the class was largely monolingual, with Sepedi as the language of learning and teaching. Students’ utterances were brief, and the discourse was mostly teacher-controlled, negating the purpose of the game and the potential for students’ language development. Here, there were several ways in which the game could have opened opportunities for participation in mathematics learning which were not used. Bilingual meaning-making conversations could have created entry points for students. Students could have been asked to restate numbers in the language of their choice; students could have been invited to justify their responses rather than just confirming by using a ‘Yes’ most of the time. Bilingual classrooms are a resource that enables participation in the community of practice.

Throughout the interaction, the teacher and students in LP8 engaged in translanguaging, the flexible use of multiple languages to make sense of mathematical ideas. Evidence from the transcripts shows that mathematics terms such as equal, double, and add were introduced in English, indicating the presence of a bilingual mathematics classroom. Numerical meaning and confirmation happened in both languages (Sepedi and English). The teacher asked one of the students, ‘Then what is fourteen in Sepedi?’. The general movement between the two languages allowed the teacher to anchor new mathematical vocabulary using English together with a familiar linguistic system.

Overall, the bilingual Bala Wande materials provide opportunities for participation in mathematical activity using multiple linguistic resources. However, the extent to which the opportunities are turned into meaningful mathematical activities largely depends on how teachers structure participation. In instances where students were given more leeway to fully participate, bilingualism functioned as a resource, but in other instances, teacher constraints reduced students’ participation in practice.

Discussion

From a situated learning perspective, learning mathematics is about increased participation in mathematical social activities. The mathematics games observed in this study created opportunities for students to participate in mathematics activity through interaction with peers, teachers, language, and other material resources. Games have the potential of moving students from the periphery to central forms of participation in mathematical practice (Wenger 1998). In multilingual classrooms, this participatory potential aligns closely with the principles of MTBBE, which recognises language as an important resource that supports access to mathematical ideas.

Games are a very important part of providing students with an opportunity to learn (Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen & Drijvers 2020). If implemented as free-play activities where the teacher only supports students when they need help with instructions, games provide students with opportunities to use both the mother tongue and English in their discussions (Venkat & Morrison 2023). Such opportunities are particularly significant in MTBBE contexts because students use their home language to test ideas, negotiate meaning, ask questions, and gradually connect informal understanding with formal mathematical discourse. The extent to which students are free to play the games and converse among themselves is key to their developing new narratives, justifying their conjectures, and asking questions. This is evidenced in one episode (LP8), where teacher control was less than in the other three episodes. Teacher control when students are playing games constricts their ability to talk either in English or in their mother tongue (Saal, Mdlulwa & Hannan 2025). This finding suggests that students’ participation and agency are strengthened when authority is evenly distributed, and students are positioned as contributors rather than responders.

Although intended play of games may have not been fully observed in the games analysed, several positives were observed. These include socialisation of students into mathematical participation norms and the use of visual mediators in the form of coordinate embodied and symbolic representations. Within MTBBE settings, games support repetition of key mathematical vocabulary, work as a bridge between home language and English language, and help stabilise meaning (Bacan 2025). Language becomes a tool for students to participate and move from the periphery and move towards full participation.

Across the different episodes, the games functioned as spaces of mathematical exploration and structured pedagogical routines designed to establish procedural fluency, language use, and classroom participation norms (Jutin & Maat 2024). There are a number of resources in these games that support the development of number sense, such as fingers, counters, and gestures. Teachers could open up spaces for conceptual elaboration if they could limit their strong presence during games. From an MTBBE perspective, these multiple semiotic resources are important because they enable students to coordinate linguistic and mathematical ideas. Mother Tongue-based Bilingual Education Programme also creates opportunities for students to explain, justify, and negotiate meanings using both languages.

While the voices of students could be heard in all four episodes, their talk did not do much to extend their mathematical knowledge in particular or to develop mathematical narratives, as most of their talk was controlled. Student agency can be improved if students initiate mathematics claims, justify and elaborate narratives, challenge and negotiate peer statements, or use visual mediators to support reasoning, like the use of fingers to illustrate what they say (Barwell 2003). Such practices are particularly important in MTBBE classrooms as they allow students to draw on the full range of their linguistic resources when constructing mathematical meaning.

Across the four episodes, students were frequently vocal, but their participation was largely confined to reacting to teacher prompts or formulaic responses within teacher-controlled routines. Students were rarely authors of narratives. The mathematical language that students used was that which the teachers used, making the students animators of teacher talk rather than initiators of new narratives. If games are played according to the norms and expectations, student talk will lead to multiple entries into the mathematical discourse (Pardede & Listiani 2024). This is relevant in MTBBE contexts, where students can use their mother tongue to formulate ideas before expressing them in English. Situated learning theory suggests that deeper learning occurs when students participate in authentic practices that allow them to negotiate meaning, justify claims, make decisions, and contribute to knowledge construction (Lave & Wenger 1991). Such opportunities were rare because teachers remained the arbiters of correctness and controlled the direction of interaction.

The findings therefore suggest that the value of games lies not simply in their use as instructional tools but in their potential to create participatory spaces that align with the goals of MTBBE. Mathematical games enable students to engage with mathematical ideas, peers, language and resources and thereby move gradually from the periphery to legitimate participation. When students are encouraged to explain their thinking, challenge ideas, justify solutions, and support one another, games become communities of practice in which mathematical understanding develops through participation. Greater opportunities for peer interaction, collaborative problem-solving and student-led discussions would strengthen both mathematical learning and student agency in multilingual early grade classrooms while advancing the broader goals of MTBBE.

Contribution

There are four main areas in which this study contributes to the broad mathematics education literature. It provides evidence that MTBBE, translanguaging and play-based pedagogy can support both mathematical understanding and student engagement in linguistically diverse classrooms. Firstly, the study positions games as bilingual stabilising spaces for mathematics classrooms because they add value through fluency, vocabulary repetition and the participation norm socialisation (Venkat & Morrison 2023). In doing so, the study demonstrates how MTBBE can be enacted through mathematical play, allowing students to draw on both the mother tongue and English as a resource for meaning-making. Secondly, games create multimodal environments where discourse and embodiment interact (Klooger et al. 2026). Thirdly, the study differentiates vocal participation from narrative authorship in mathematics learning contexts (Barwell 2003), showing how bilingual students can actively contribute to mathematical discourse in multiple languages. Lastly, teacher control can transform learning of procedural routines that underpin concepts by harnessing learning opportunities that games (and other mathematics) activities provide for the students. These findings highlight the potential of MTBBE when integrated with play-based approaches to expand opportunities for participation and mathematical learning.

Recommendations

Games should not just be time fillers; teachers should use them intentionally and be able to adapt the games to their situations. Our analysis showed that facilitation style affects student engagement and participation. Teachers should be given more training in the use of games and encouraged to allow students to play independently rather than as a whole class, as seen in the episodes presented in this analysis. The Bala Wande training team should be intentional in helping teachers link planned learning objectives to specific games. In line with the principles of MTBBE, teachers should also be encouraged to leverage students’ home language during game-based activities to support participation, meaning-making and mathematical communication.

Videos of teachers playing games could be useful in support of this training. Further data collection and research could provide additional insight into the use of games to see if teacher enactment leads to more active and meaningful learning experiences, including those supported through MTBBE practices, that are planned by the Bala Wande material.

Conclusion

The findings presented above show that mathematics games provide a structure that creates opportunities for student learning. From a MTBBE perspective, mathematics learning is progressive, and all the episodes analysed provided evidence that games give students an opportunity to consolidate and grow their mathematical discourse. The Bala Wande games also provided students with an opportunity to use more than one language when talking about the mathematical activities they are doing. However, the evidence did show that there is much more potential for language mixing and translanguaging, which could be harnessed by teachers as a pedagogical resource. Students were vocal when playing games (more so than in other parts of the lesson), but there was room to allow them more independence and more time for peer-to-peer interactions, where they would express their ideas more fully. Within MTBBE, this would provide teachers with opportunities to listen to the students talk, prompt them, and probe their understanding based on what they have said. Thus, our analysis showed that games provide both students and teachers with opportunities, which can be taken up to a greater or lesser extent, but no matter what level of take-up is possible in the context, there is a positive value add from playing games in early grade mathematics classes.

Acknowledgements

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Sihlobosenkosi Mpofu: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ingrid Sapire: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Validation, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Yutao Zhao: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Visualisation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. All 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.

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, Sihlobosenkosi Mpofu.

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