Educ Stud Math (2014) 86:157176

DOI 10.1007/s10649-014-9534-6

Learning to see pipes mathematically: preapprentices

mathematical activity in pipe trades training
Lionel LaCroix

Published online: 6 February 2014

# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract This study examines adult students enrolled in pipe trades preapprenticeship
training to identify distinguishing features of the mathematical activity within their program
and sources of their mathematics-related difficulties. Two closely related sociocultural perspectives, specifically cultural historical activity theory and the theory of knowledge objectification, frame this investigation. Like workplace mathematics practices reported elsewhere,
mathematics within this preapprenticeship program was inextricably tied to the efficient
production of objects of workplace activity, in this case, the design and fabrication of a
limited number of well-defined objects of pipe trades production. This form of mathematical
activity was also mediated intensely by semiotic tools and norms of practice specific to the
pipe trades. The contribution of this study is the finding that the great majority of the
mathematics difficulties encountered by students can be attributed to their novice levels of
awareness of the objects of pipe trades production and related ways of working rather than
the mathematics understandings that they brought to this endeavor. Implications are identified
for the teaching of mathematics in skilled trades training generally, developing students
mathematical subjectivities within trades training, and the mathematics preparation of secondary school students who will be entering skilled trades. Questions are also raised for
further research.
Keywords Workplace mathematics . Mathematics education . Skilled trades . Cultural historical
activity theory . Objectification . Subjectification

1 Introduction
Preparing students to use mathematics effectively in the workplace is an important and
complex challenge in mathematics education. While the utility of mathematics is commonly
accepted as justification for its central place in the school curriculum, research conducted in a
variety of contexts shows that workplace mathematics practices can differ in significant ways

L. LaCroix (*)
Peel District School Board, Mississauga, ON, Canada
e-mail: lionel.lacroix@cogeco.ca

158

L. LaCroix

from traditional school mathematics (e.g., Jurdak & Shahin, 2001; Masingila, 1993; Noss,
Hoyles, & Pozzi, 2000; Triantafillou & Potari, 2010; Williams & Wake, 2007b; Zevenbergen
& Zevenbergen, 2009). A number of reports also indicate that many students leave school
unprepared to face the numeracy demands of the workplace and those of workplace training
(e.g., Fownes, Thompson, & Evetts, 2002; Hoyles, Noss, Kent, & Bakker, 2010; Zevenbergen
& Zevenbergen, 2004, 2009). Moreover, school mathematics can even hinder workers
abilities to perceive the mathematics that is used in the workplace (Forman & Steen, 2000).
Thus, a deeper understanding of the transition that students face as they are initiated into
workplace mathematics practices is essential for informing workplace mathematics training
and school mathematics.
The work on situated cognition by Lave (1988), for example, and others has informed
much of the workplace mathematics research that has been done over the past two decades
by drawing attention to the central role of structuring resources provided by the sociocultural contexts where mathematics is used. More recently, many researchers have adopted
cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) (Leontev, 1978) as a theoretical perspective for
analyzing workplace mathematics. While addressing contextual dimensions of cognition,
this sociocultural orientation provides a comprehensive set of analytic tools for analyzing
the socioculturally, historically situated, and dynamically inter-related elements of cultural
practices including mathematics (Williams & Wake, 2007a). To date, a diverse range of
workplace mathematics practices have been examined in the research literature including
that of carpet installation (Masingila, 1994); investment banking, pediatric nursing, and
aviation (Noss et al., 2000); Arabic plumbing (sheet metal work in North American skilledtrade parlance) (Jurdak & Shahin, 2001); fish hatching (Roth, 2005); an industrial chemistry
laboratory, automated (CNC) machine operation in a metal workshop, and fuel management
within the utilities department of an industrial chemical plant (Williams & Wake, 2007a);
telecommunications system repair (Triantafillou & Potari, 2010); and boat building
(Zevenbergen & Zevenbergen, 2009). At present, it is recognized that mathematics practices
in the workplace are shaped by the immediate and practical requirements of workplace
production; that is, getting particular tasks accomplished with ease and efficiency using
resources at hand rather than the goals and norms of generality, formality, and internal
consistency commonly associated with school mathematics (Noss et al., 2000; Williams &
Wake, 2007b). Furthermore, it is also recognized that mathematics is often obscured by the
production goals, technology, artifacts, and established routines of workplace activity
(Williams & Wake, 2007a).
In comparison to the range and depth of research on workplace mathematics practices, the
body of empirical research on workplace mathematics training and learning, and newcomers
encounters with workplace mathematics practices in situ, is considerably less developed.
Researching this area for the purpose of making generalizations to improve workplace
mathematics training, and mathematics in school for students going on to workplace training,
is complicated by the diversity of workplace production practices across different sectors and,
in turn, the associated workplace mathematics practices. It is complicated further by the variety
of forms that workplace training takes across different sectors, as well as the way that
mathematics on-the-job is inextricably bound up within, and obscured by, workplace production practices that are often the primary focus of workplace training and workers attention
during training.
A number of research reports on workplace mathematics training activity have focused on a
small group of trainees or an individual, often having difficulty with a single mathematicsrelated task. Eberhard (2000), for example, provided a brief examination of students in a
technical secondary school program working on the task of laying out measurements from

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

159

specifications for the foundation of a garage, provided on a technical drawing. Williams,

Wake, and Boreham (2001) examined the challenges faced by a college mathematics and
chemistry student reading the idiosyncratic graphical output of a materials testing machine in
an industrial laboratory during a 1-week work placement that was part of her college program.
From an earlier session of the training program that provides context for the present study,
Martin, LaCroix, and Fownes (2005) examined the difficulties of a pipe trades preapprentice
with fractions of an inch while working on a pipe assembly construction exercise. Taking a
different tack, Martin and LaCroix (2008) examined the diversity of mathematics-related
knowledge that was apparent as three ironwork apprentices successfully completed an authentic workplace problem-solving task during the year-two college component of their apprenticeship accreditation training.
Broader perspectives of training and learning in workplace mathematics training are
provided by Ridgway (2000) and FitzSimons, Mlcek, Hull, and Wright (2005). In an effort
to make recommendations regarding the mathematics preparation of students at school prior to
entering apprenticeship training, Ridgway surveyed the mathematics used by engineering
apprentices (precision machinists in North American trade parlance) and the predictors of
success within their formal training, as indicated by various measures of educational attainment. FitzSimons et al. surveyed the mathematics-related practices related to chemical
spraying applications and the training of new workers within a variety of horticultural,
agricultural, and outdoor recreational workplaces. Their findings on numeracy training within
their sector were of a general nature, describing how learning takes placemost often through
hands-on experience on the job under the direction of more experienced employees. Several
other significant workplace mathematics training research studies have also been undertaken.
Hoyles et al. (2010) conducted a comprehensive study to explore techno-mathematical
literaciesthe coordination of mathematical, information technology, and workplacespecific competencieswithin the workplace practices of companies in a variety of industries.
They then created software applications for developing this form of literacy with intermediate
level managers in these companies. Bakker and Akkerman (2013, this issue) used a targeted
pedagogical intervention during students internships within a medical testing laboratory to
examine the integration of school-taught statistics concepts with workplace-related knowledge.
Hahn (2011, this issue) developed and analyzed a targeted intervention to help business studies
apprentices enrolled in a university Masters course apply statistics concepts within workplace
contexts. Finally, Bakker, Groenveld, Wijers, Akkerman, and Gravemeijer (2012) conducted a
targeted intervention to help senior secondary school vocational students develop proportional
reasoning in relation to the concentration and dilution of liquids within the context of their
science laboratory training.
The present study examines the mathematics-related activity of preapprenticeship students
within a pipe trades training program conducted at a trade union run school in British
Columbia, Canada, with particular emphasis on the students mathematics-related difficulties
as well as sources of these difficulties. The particular session of this workplace training
program is unlike other training programs described in the research literature in that it focused
explicitly and intensely on a variety of workplace mathematics competencies required for
gaining accreditation as a tradesperson: it addressed workplace mathematics through highly
integrated classroom and practical workshop learning experiences, and it led directly to paid
employment as an entry-level apprentice for most, if not all, of the participants. This study
makes a unique contribution to workplace mathematics research by providing a comprehensive examination of the specific features of pipe trades mathematics within this training
context, as well as the sustained efforts of individual students in resolving the full range of
mathematics-related difficulties that they encountered over the duration of the course.

160

L. LaCroix

2 Research questions
Two research questions guided this inquiry:

&
&

What is the nature of mathematical activity in pipe trades training?

What are sources of the preapprentices difficulties when doing mathematics within this
workplace training program?

The term pipe trades refers here to the closely related skilled trades of plumbing, steam
fitting, sprinkler fitting, and gas fitting.

3 Theoretical perspective
Culturalhistorical activity theory and Radfords (2008b) closely related culturalsemiotic
theory of knowledge objectification (TO) are used for this analysis. CHAT frames human
thinking and behavior as co-constituent elements of collectively organized, culturally mediated, historically evolving, and practical object-oriented activity systems, the fundamental unit of
analysis (Roth & Lee, 2007). It thus serves to distinguish the unique and situated dimensions
of different forms of workplace mathematics. Basic to CHAT is a commitment to dialecticalmaterialist ontology (Roth, Radford, & LaCroix, 2012). From this perspective, all of the
constituent elements of workplace production activity are recognized as structuring resources
that give it mathematical and vocational meaning for participants (Pozzi, Noss, & Hoyles,
1998). Radfords theory, specific to mathematics, provides analytic tools for understanding in
greater detail the historical, cultural, and semiotic dimensions of mathematical thinking and
learning, as well as the dimension of subjectivity as individuals become participants within
particular forms of mathematical activity.
The analytic categories of objects, goals, tools or artifacts, and rules or norms from CHAT
draw attention to ways that mathematics within particular forms of workplace activity are
distinct forms of mathematics practice, inseparable from their corresponding context of
workplace production (see Roth, 2005; Roth et al., 2012). Analytic tools used from the TO
are: (a) knowledge objectification (or simply objectification), (b) subjectification, (c) the
territory of artifactual thinking, and (d) semiotic systems of cultural signification. Together,
they highlight the socially and semiotically mediated and dialectical nature of thinking within
this activity and further distinguish this form of mathematical activity. As part of a broader
CHAT perspective, Radford (2008b) conceptualizes mathematics learning as an interactive and
creative encounter with historically constituted forms of thinkinga process of objectification.
Drawing on Hegelian phenomenology, objectification refers to a dialectical process of becoming consciously aware of, making sense of, and becoming critically conversant with cultural
objects and systems of thought as one comes to participate within and contribute to cultural
forms of activity, such as mathematics (see also Radford, 2008c, 2009). In this light, students
facing irresolvable mathematics difficulties or breakdowns reflect inabilities, under particular
circumstances, to mobilize sufficient resources to achieve a sufficient level of objectification to
complete the tasks at hand. Learning, however, involves much more than objectification; it is
a process where knowing and being are mutually constitutive (Radford, 2008b, p. 215); that
is, a reflexive process through which the learner also becomes someonea process of
subjectification.
An important aspect that makes Radfords view of objectification distinctive from other
views of learning is the close relationship that it bears with the Vygotskian concept of

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

161

consciousness and its mediated nature (Vygotsky, 1979; see also Leontev, 1978). From this
perspective, consciousness is formed through encounters with other subjects and the historical
intelligence embodied in artifacts and signs that mediate our actions and reflections. This idea
is reflected in Radfords (2008a) concept of territory of artifactual thought or technology of
semiotic mediation. This foregrounds the role of semiotic tools and other artifacts as constituents of what we think and feel, and our very being within cultural historical activity, rather
than as mere technical instruments used to get things done. Closely related to this is Radfords
(2003) concept of semiotic systems of cultural significations; that is, cultural symbolic systems
that make available varied sources for meaning-making through specific social signifying
practices (p. 60). This relates to notions of mathematical truth or reality, its assumed nature,
evidence, methods of enquiry, the manner in which mathematical objects are considered to be
knowable, and the way that mathematical knowledge can be represented.

4 Method
This interpretive study is part of a larger project that examined mathematics learning within a
number of construction trades training courses in British Columbia, Canada. I served as the
field researcher for this project, visiting and collecting data within various training programs
over a 21-month period. This included intensive interaction with students and data collection
within a previous session of the pipe trades preapprenticeship course that is the focus here, as
well as a fourth year plumbing apprenticeship course at a technical college.
4.1 Setting and participants
The 8-week pipe trades preapprenticeship program was taught by a qualified and experienced
steamfitter. The classroom component of this course addressed: (a) workplace safety; (b) first
aid; (c) piping materials, related hardware, and pipe trades terminology; (d) reading and
preparation of isometric and orthographic technical drawings; (e) some of the physical
science related to the production methods; (f) mathematics required for the design and
fabrication of various types of pipe assemblies; and (g) the use of trade-specific reference
documents. The practical component of the course, conducted in the school workshop,
addressed tool and equipment use and the physical construction of different types of pipe
assemblies that incorporated the mathematics done in the classroom. Mathematics-related
topics were typically introduced in the classroom and related pencil-and-paper exercises
completed in advance of the students applying their learning to complete fabrication tasks in
the workshop, and a typical day included time spent in both places. While not part of the
formal apprenticeship credentialing process, this course was designed to provide students
with theoretical and practical knowledge and skills so that they would be able to work
productively and safely as entry-level apprentices. A second goal was to provide students
with a head start on some of the course content addressed subsequently in the college
components of their formal apprenticeship training. A typical apprenticeship in the pipe
trades in British Columbia takes 4 years, with 6 to 8 weeks per year spent at a technical
college, and the remainder of the time spent as a paid employee in the workplace. At the end
of this period, apprentices must pass a final credentialing exam set by the provincial training
authority.
All but one of these select groups of 15 students were secondary school graduates. Their
backgrounds reflected a variety of secondary and post-secondary experiences; the great
majority had five or more years of work experience in unskilled occupations, and all were

162

L. LaCroix

highly motivated because, upon successful completion of this course, they would become
eligible for placement within entry-level apprenticeship positions in companies associated with
the trade union running the program. Last, but not least, it should be noted that all of these
students successfully completed the preapprenticeship course.
4.2 Procedure and data collection
Throughout the course, I attended the class regularly and served as a mathematics tutor at a
designated table at the rear of the classroom for any preapprentices who wanted to work with
me or with fellow students. At other times, I observed and interacted with students about their
mathematics-related coursework as they completed pencil-and-paper classroom activities and
practical workshop tasks. My goal as researcher was to reveal and document (a) the
mathematics-related coursework in the preapprenticeship program; (b) the students thinking
while completing this work, with a minimum of direction from me in the process; and (c) the
students interactions while resolving their difficulties. My modus operandi was to attend
patiently and carefully to the students comments, questions, and written work while they
completed their assigned tasks; to pay particular attention to situations when they experienced
difficulties or breakdowns; and to allow them to lead their conversations with me or one
another as much as possible. The focus on students difficulties was similar to the approach
used by Pozzi et al. (1998) and Williams and Wake (2007a), who used breakdowns in the
mathematical activity of nurses on the job and college students investigating mathematics
practices in the workplace, respectively, as a means to identify salient mathematics. When
difficulties were encountered, I prompted the preapprentices to articulate their thinking to help
them to be clear and explicit about this, both for themselves and for research purposes, before
offering direction. Then, when offering help, I endeavored to keep my directions to a minimum
so that students were encouraged to resolve their difficulties for themselves as much as
possible.
Most of the activity of individuals and groups of preapprentices interacting with me or
others at the help table, some of the whole class instruction provided by the course instructor,
and some of the students mathematics-related practical work in the workshop were documented on 26 h of video tape using a portable camera. Over the course duration, 12 of the 15
apprentices in the class were captured on video at the help table working and/or seeking help.
The sample of students efforts to resolve mathematics-related difficulties captured on video
was, therefore, a substantial sample of difficulties experienced by the students over the entire
course. It should be noted, however, that not all of the students would have found it necessary
or preferable to come to the help table to resolve their mathematics-related difficulties and, at
times, with up to eight individuals sorting things out among themselves on camera at the help
table, it was not possible to attend to everything that was said from the video recordings.
Throughout this, and the previous session of the preapprenticeship course, I had regular
conversations with the course instructor to ensure that I understood the important ideas behind
the work assigned to students from his perspective as a pipe trades insider, and kept field notes
from our encounters. Print materials used by students in the course, selected copies of
preapprentices written work, and background information on individual students were also
collected for analysis. Print materials used in all four levels of the plumbing program at a local
technical college (one of the institutions receiving students from this preapprenticeship
program), field notes from discussions with the pipe trades instructors and fourth year
plumbing apprentices there, and the formal provincial plumbing apprenticeship program
syllabus published by the Industry Training Authority of British Columbia (2009) also
informed this analysis.

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

163

4.3 Data analysis

The identification and characterization of the different kinds of tasks that comprised the
preapprentices mathematical activity was based on analysis of the complete set of
mathematics-related print materials that were used during the course (i.e., instructional materials, all assigned classroom exercises and practical fabrication tasks, technical reference
materials, and student evaluation tasks), the video record of the students using these materials,
copies of students written work retained from class, as well as my field notes taken during the
course. The first step in the analysis involved categorizing the tasks completed by the
preapprentices and the mathematics associated with each category. This was a straightforward
process in that the great majority of the tasks assigned involved finding the measurements or
specifications for one of a small number of objects common to the pipe trades. There were only
two types of tasks assigned where this was not the case. In these cases, the focus was on
practicing particular calculations in isolation for subsequent use in practical applications. Once
the set of task categories was established, I identified the following attributes for each: (a) the
physical or mathematical object involved, (b) the specific kinds of the mathematics calculations (actions) involved, (c) the goals or objective of the calculations, (d) the tools or artifacts
used, and (e) any pipe trades-specific norms related to the calculations. Once the initial phase
of analysis was complete, the next step involved analysis of the preapprentices mathematical
activity across tasks to identify and characterize the semiotic systems of cultural signification
and territory of artifactual thinking that were inherent to the preapprentices mathematical
activity as a whole. The final step was the construction of the description of the nature of the
preapprentices mathematics activity within their training program.
Identification of the sources of the preapprentices mathematics-related difficulties first
required the identification of instances from the video data when individuals encountered a
mathematics-related difficulty while completing their assigned coursework and which were
subsequently resolved. In each case, analysis of the discourse involving the preapprentices
served as the primary basis for identifying each difficulty and its source(s) or, at least, a
significant part of the source(s), recognizing that all elements of the preapprentices activity
served to mediate their thinking. From the perspective of the theory of knowledge objectification, efforts to resolve difficulties such as these are regarded as a process of objectification
the social and semiotically mediated process through which individuals achieve a level of
awareness of essential aspects of their activity that enables them to achieve their goals in
culturally appropriate ways (Radford, 2008b)in this case, for the preapprentices to complete
their assigned coursework successfully.
Given that experiencing and overcoming difficulties is a normal and expected part of
learning mathematics, I focused on the more serious kinds of difficulties that, under different
circumstances (i.e., without the availability of a mathematics tutor, or with less resourceful
students), would be ones more likely to impede the preapprentices progress and success in
their training if left unaddressed. In operational terms, I observed and identified the occurrence
of these kinds of mathematics difficulties when students (a) encountered irresolvable breakdowns requiring the help of other individuals, (b) made unnoticed errors, (c) completed
mathematics tasks correctly but by methods that did not reflect the cultural norms of reliability
and efficiency associated with pipe trades workplace production (as conveyed to the class by
the course instructor), or (d) experienced other kinds of difficulties that interfered with their
progress. Difficulties were identified (a) from students self reports of having difficulty, (b)
when students sought assistance with an assigned task from me, another student, or the
specialist workplace educator who visited the class for a few hours each week, or (c) from
errors evident in students discourse relating to something that they were expected to have

164

L. LaCroix

known or figured out from their prior schooling, life experience, or course information
provided. The following were not considered difficulties in this analysis: (a) when additional
information was needed to complete a task that students werent expected to know or be able
to figure out on their own, (b) when students sought confirmation that their results were
correct, or (c) when direction was provided to students but the root of their difficulty was not
clear from the available data. In other words, instances where efforts were made to provide
assistance, by themselves, were not considered. This definition is open to interpretation and I
drew upon my own industrial and education sector experience to make these determinations.
The video recording of the discourse and copies of the print artifacts used in each episode
where a preapprentice experienced a mathematics-related difficulty were then analyzed to
identify the source(s) of the individuals difficulty in each case. Categories provided by
CHAT and TO served to orient this analysis. Initially, these categories included: (a) students
understanding or level of objectification of the piping object in the task they were working on,
(b) their ability to make sense of and use the pipe trades tools and artifacts associated with the
task, and (c) their ability to employ norms of pipe trades practice in their work. As the analysis
proceeded, a distinction was made between students level of awareness of the physical objects
of their activity and their awareness of the mathematical thinking or mathematization behind the
design and fabrication of these objects. In addition, I examined students spontaneously
expressed feelings about mathematics as they completed their work. These comments revealed
preapprentices ways of being, or subjectification, in relation to the mathematics they were
doing. Throughout the analysis, the precise definitions of the CHAT- and TO-based categories
of the sources of the preapprentices difficulties within this activity were reviewed and refined
to ground them in the empirical data. The outcome is a set of six distinct categories of sources of
students difficulties that accommodates all of the instances identified.

5 The nature of mathematical activity in pipe trades training

In this section, I describe the essential features of preapprentices pipe trades mathematical
activity, along with the instructors means of introducing constituent kinds of tasks and forms
of mathematics practice to them. Together, these comprise the mathematical activity within the
preapprenticeship course. Categories from CHAT and the TO serve to foreground the distinctive features of this mathematical activity.
5.1 Objects, actions, and goals
The preapprentices classroom mathematical activity was centered on the completion of
pencil-and-paper exercises related to a limited number of well-defined and common pipe
trades production tasks. These exercises reflected the calculations or actions needed for various
types of piping assemblies and related equipmentthe ideal and material objects (in Russian
obekt, GermanObjekt) of pipe trades production activity that, in turn, reflect the object/
motive (in Russianpredmet, German-Gegenstand) of pipe trades production activity as a
whole (see Roth, 2014). Specifically, the preapprentices work involved mathematics used in
the production of (a) screwed pipe, bent pipe, and welded pipe assemblies; and (b) rolling and
parallel offset pipe assembly configurations (see, e.g., Fig. 1), as well as (c) calculations
relating to the specifications of various kinds of pipes and storage tanks. These exercises were
very similar to those that the preapprentices would encounter on their written tests in the
course. A review of the print materials from all four levels of the plumbing program at the local
technical college and discussions with the pipe trades instructors there, along with a review of

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

165

Fig. 1 A parallel offset screwed

pipe calculation task for a pipe diameter to be specified. The three
darker sets of lines represent pipes.
Students used the information given to solve for unknown pipe
lengths ag, accounting for the
distances (take-offs) taken up by
industry standard 45 elbow fittings. Note: Single prime and double prime signs following numbers
are used in imperial measurement
to signify feet and inches,
respectively

the provincial plumbing apprenticeship program syllabus, confirmed that the mathematical
activity within the preapprenticeship program reflected that of formal apprenticeship training
in the pipe trades that followed. Throughout their training, an important, although not
explicitly articulated, goal was for the students to objectify common piping objects in a pipe
trades mathematical way; that is, to see these objects in ways similar to experienced
tradespersons.
The preapprentices mathematical actions involved (a) fractions, mixed numbers, decimal
numbers; (b) arithmetic and algebraic formulas to determine length, perimeter, circumference,
surface area, volume or capacity, weight, force, and pressure; (c) applying primary trigonometric relationships and the Pythagorean theorem to solve for unknown side lengths or acute
angles in right triangles; (d) reading technical drawings, reference tables, graphs, as well as the
inscription pattern on an imperial measuring tape; and (e) converting measurements between
imperial, US, and metric units using conversion factors on reference materials provided.
Throughout the preapprenticeship program, students work on pencil-and-paper exercises in
the classroom preceded their practical work fabricating the corresponding types of piping
objects in the workshop. In two cases, the preapprentices were assigned pencil-and-paper
exercises that focused on isolated mathematics processes. One involved solving for an
unknown side length or acute angle in right triangles like introductory trigonometry exercises
found in traditional school textbooks (for subsequent use in offset calculations with bent pipe).
The other involved conversions between (a) inches and fractional parts of an inch; (b) inches
and decimal parts of an inch; (c) feet, inches, and fractional parts of an inch; and (d) feet and
decimal parts of a foot for use in area and volume calculations.
Mathematics within the context of the preapprenticeship course served instrumental purposes; that is, to meet pipe trades production requirements in an efficient and reliable manner.
The instructor told the class that he was not concerned with the methods used, provided their
results were close enough (which usually meant to the nearest 16th of an inch) on a
consistent basis. Nor did the instructor spend class time explaining the reasoning behind any
of the mathematics needed. The goal of efficiency with the use of mathematics was reinforced
by the mantra, repeated on a number of occasions by the course instructor, time is money.
The course instructors approach to teaching was traditional, transmission based. It
consisted of (a) describing briefly each new type of piping object to be worked on and the

166

L. LaCroix

purpose served by, or the goal of, the calculations in the assigned exercises; (b) providing a
worked example of the required mathematical operations for the class; (c) answering students
questions about the example; and (d) assigning a set of similar practice exercises on
worksheets. During his explanations, the instructor introduced various tools and ways of
working that were specific to pipe trades mathematics, including (a) formulas, (b) algorithms,
(c) terminology, and (d) print reference materials (all of these being forms of semiotic tools), as
well as (e) industry norms related to the particular requirements of the piping objects involved
in the exercises. The print materials handed out in class often contained additional examples
worked out in a highly prescriptive manner (e.g., using semiotic tools like that show in Fig. 2).
Students were encouraged to work together to resolve difficulties on their own. The instructor
variously discussed the answers to the assigned tasks with the class, provided written solutions
for students to refer to, or directed students to check their answers amongst themselves.
Normally, the course instructor was available to provide some assistance to students while
they completed their work. However, during the present study, he left this job principally to
me. A specialist workplace educator who regularly visited the class also provided assistance to
students, often with me at the table at the back of the classroom, during this study, and her
interactions with students were also captured on video. Students were given the option of using
some of their shop time to finish their classroom work, and many of the regular participants at
the help table took advantage of this to get help with their mathematics exercises.
The course instructor explained that, while the students were responsible for knowing all of
the content addressed in their apprenticeship training (and reflected in the provincial apprenticeship training syllabi), they would not encounter all of this when they entered the workplace
as apprentices or, eventually, as credentialed tradespersons. This assertion reflects the wide
range of roles available in industry to qualified tradespersons in the pipe trades, and the
preapprentices did not question this. A pipe trade instructor at the technical college put this into
sharper perspective, specifically for plumbing, when he commented, Only about a third of the
math covered here in formal [plumbing] apprenticeship training will be dealt with in your
career. One half would indicate a rich and varied career as a plumber.
5.2 Tools
A number of formulas, algorithms, technical terms, symbols, sign systems, print resources, and
other artifacts served as tools within the preapprentices mathematical activity. Many of these
are specific to the pipe trades, while others are more commonly used. One example was a
formula (a form of semiotic tool) for calculating the take-off for a bend in a pipe,
take off tan 2  radius of elbow, where represents the angle of the bend (customarily
measured in degrees as the acute angle of deviation in the path from one straight segment of
To
find
side
T
O
R
O
T
R

When
you
know
side
O
T
O
R
R
T

Fig. 2 A semiotic tool for performing offset pipe calculations

Multiply
side

For a
45
ell by

For a 22
ell by

O
T
O
R
R
T

1.414
.707
1
1
1.414
.707

2.613
.383
2.414
.414
1.082
.933

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

167

pipe to the next). This formula gives the portion of a straight pipe length taken up by a bend of
a specified size. It is necessary because of the convention or norm on pipe drawings to leave
out any representation of the curvature of fittings and bends between straight sections of pipe,
and to specify distances from the center of one pipe bend or elbow fitting to the next (as is the
case for lengths a, b, and c in Fig. 1), or from the center of a bend or fitting to the other end of a
pipe if it is straight (as is the case for lengths d, e, f, and g in Fig. 1). The formula pipe bend
length=bend radiusdegrees of turn0.0174 is then used to determine the arc length of the
bend so that the straight pipe can be cut to length before it is bent. The preapprentices were
directed by their instructor to use the sine of 1 from their calculators for the constant, instead
of memorizing this value, without further explanation (i.e., the sine of 1 provided an
acceptable approximation of the radian measure equivalent for 1).
A set of algorithms and an accompanying sign system (both forms of semiotic tools) used
to calculate the unknown side of the triangles encountered when constructing pipe assemblies
using either 45 or 22 12 elbow fittings or ells can be seen in Fig. 2. The students were directed
to use this print artifact to solve for the side lengths in 454590 triangles in parallel offset pipe
calculation exercises, like that shown in Fig. 1, as well. Other than 90 elbows, 45 elbow
fittings are, by far, the most common fittings used with screwed pipe assemblies in the pipe
trades, and most tradespersons in the pipe trades commit the corresponding multiplication
constants to memory, as did many of the preapprentices. No explanation was given regarding
the derivation of this set of algorithms. Students were expected to know simply how to follow
these directions.
Throughout the course, regular use was also made of piping industry standard reference
tables like those in The Pipe Fitters and Pipe Welders Handbook (Frankland, 1984), a pocketsized reference book (semiotic artifact) commonly carried by tradespersons on the job. It
contains the specifications for different kinds of pipes and fittings used in pipe assembly
construction; for example, inside and outside diameters for standard pipes, (empty) iron pipe
weights per lineal foot, and the fitting allowances and thread engagement values for various
types and sizes of screwed pipe fittings. It also contains formulas and step-by-step algorithms
for performing a wide variety of pipe trades mathematics procedures, like those discussed here,
as well as other useful technical information. Other semiotic artifacts commonly used by the
preapprentices included imperial measuring tapes, a ubiquitous tool in the workplace with a
complicated system of markings signifying various binary fractions (halves, quarters, eighths,
etc.) of an inch intervals simultaneously on a single number line, and electronic calculators.
The use of computers as part of pipe trades production work was conspicuously absent within
this program, and the course instructors and fourth year apprentices at the technical college
confirmed that this was also their experience in the workplace as well.
While all of the mathematics done within the preapprenticeship program was part of the
credentialing requirements in the pipe trades, the course instructor explained that there were
sometimes quicker and easier ways of doing some things on the job. One example, applicable
when working with fittings for smaller sizes of screwed pipe, involved approximating the takeoff values of fittings (i.e., the distance from the end of a pipe screwed into a fitting and the
center of the fitting) by eye-balling it (i.e., approximating it visually) with a measuring tape on
the fitting, rather than looking up the precise fitting allowance and thread engagement values
on a reference table and calculating the required take-offs precisely from these. The small
errors resulting from this approach would be within acceptable tolerances. Another example
was applicable when bending smaller gauges of copper pipe using a vice-mounted hand tool
(like the bending tool referred to by Roth, 2012, this issue). Here, the measurement markings
built into this tool, and the ability to trim these pipes to their required lengths easily after
bending, alleviate the need to calculate the take-off and bend length values beforehand. The

168

L. LaCroix

course instructor indicated, however, that the take-off and bend length formulas were still
needed when working with a larger pipe using a hydraulic bending machine because, in this
case, it was necessary to cut the pipe to length precisely prior to bending.
5.3 Rules and norms of practice
Despite Canada being an officially metric jurisdiction, it remains the norm in the pipe trades to
measure distances in imperial measure (feet, inches, and fractions of an inch) much of the time.
The main reason for this is that the equipment used in the Canadian pipe trades is
manufactured for both the Canadian and US markets. In the case of screwed pipe, for example,
the pipe and factory fittings used worldwide are manufactured exclusively in American
standard (imperial) sizes. Another norm of pipe trades mathematics used by the preapprentices
was that of measuring and calculating lengths using binary fractions to the nearest 16th of an
inch, with the exception of welded pipe calculations where tolerances were calculated to the
nearest 32nd of an inch. Other mathematics norms used in the preapprenticeship course were
similar, if not identical, to those used in other contexts including school mathematics, such as
the practice of writing fractional values in simplest or lowest terms.
There were a number of workplace norms related to the graphic representation of pipe
assemblies and related equipment, reflected in semiotic tools used in the preapprenticeship
course. While many of these norms are common to the technical drawings used throughout the
construction industry, a number were specific to the pipe trades. One example, mentioned
earlier, was that of using straight lines meeting at vertices to represent physical pipe assemblies
comprised of straight segments of pipe with curved components between them.
5.4 Semiotic system of cultural signification
As mentioned earlier, a prominent mathematical object within the preapprentices activity
was the discrete set of binary fractions used to designate parts of an inch. This mathematical
object was crystallized in the pattern of markings on the imperial measuring tapes that
students used throughout the course. For the preapprentices, this set of fractions served as
the basis of their numerical reality for length values, given that all values that they worked
with were rounded off to 16ths or 32nds of an inch. This, in turn, mediated their related
mathematical activity by focusing attention exclusively on computation methods that served
this system of measurement. Additional steps to achieve greater degrees of accuracy or other
fractional values served no practical purpose and were therefore not a consideration. The only
exception to working in binary fractions occurred when calculating areas and volumes based
on length values given initially in binary fractions of an inch. These values were calculated
with an electronic calculator using equivalent decimal values, although results were rounded
off to specified and discrete units such as the nearest square or cubic inch or foot or some
other unit of volume.
Within the pipe trades, the notion of fit (of the pipes) provides the ultimate justification or
proof of ones measurement calculations, and thus served as the basis for mathematical truth or
validity within the semiotic system of cultural signification of the preapprentices mathematical activity as well. Here and in most, if not all, other forms of material production work,
qualitative and empirical methods served as the customary means for establishing fitdo the
measurement calculations serve getting the job done? Adherence to this norm drew the
students attention to the functionality of the material objects of workplace production for
validation of measurement calculations, rather than to the logic of computational processes. To
put this into perspective, compare the empirical approach just described with that of formal

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

169

school mathematics where mathematical truth or validity is often based upon the precise
application of rational methods and symbolic representations (more often than not as arbitrated
by the teacher).
5.5 Territory of artifactual thought
As described earlier, various semiotic tools common to the pipe trades were integral to the
preapprentices mathematical activity and thinking. These included (a) the imperial measuring
tape with its sophisticated set of markings signifying various binary fraction-of-an-inch
intervals and, in some cases, its use as number line for visualizing addition and subtraction
calculations involving fraction-of-an-inch values in lieu of pencil-and-paper computations; (b)
print artifacts containing formulas, algorithms, and various sign systems like those discussed
earlier; as well as (c) technical drawings of various pipe assemblies. The students often referred
back and forth between their pipe drawings and their handwritten calculations to organize and
ground their thinking. For example, the preapprentices used the pipe drawings to determine
and keep track of next steps in their sequences of calculations and also related the physical
meanings of the numbers that they were calculating to the corresponding measurements of the
piping objects represented on the drawings in order to make sense of these.

6 Sources of preapprentices difficulties doing pipe trades mathematics

Altogether, 116 episodes of preapprentices having difficulty with the mathematical aspects of
their assigned course work were identified from the video data. A set of CHAT based and
empirically grounded categories of preapprentices difficulties was constructed from the
analysis of these episodes to account for the sources of the students difficulties. In 103 of
the episodes, a single source of difficulty was identified. In 13 of the episodes, two distinct
sources of difficulty were identified making for 129 times in the data when a source of
difficulty was seen as interfering with the students mathematical activity. Of the total number
of times that a difficulty was identified, 78 % of these difficulties were experienced by only
four of the preapprentices who found the pipe trades mathematics exercises they were assigned
to be particularly difficult and who sought assistance regularly.
The most common preapprentices difficulties reflected their novice levels of objectification
of the material objects of pipe trades production and the pipe trades mathematical thinking
behind the design and fabrication of these objects, and the semiotic tools or resources used
within pipe trades mathematical activity. Difficulties identified also reflected, but to a lesser
degree, the students novice levels of objectification of the norms of pipe trades mathematics
practice, their troubles with common mathematics objects and tools like those associated with
school mathematics, and their ways of being with, or subjectification, in relation to doing
mathematics within the preapprenticeship course.
6.1 Awareness of the objects of pipe trades production
Almost half of the preapprentices mathematical difficulties identified (62 of 129) were
attributed to their novice levels of awareness of the material objects of pipe trades productionthe pipe assemblies and related equipmentencountered in their course work. Each of
these difficulties fits one of two subcategories: 18 were attributed to the preapprentices level
of awareness of the material piping objects that they encountered in their work, while the
remaining 44 were attributed to the preapprentices level of awareness of the pipe trades

170

L. LaCroix

mathematical thinking behind the design and fabrication of these objects. The latter subcategory presumes, of course, that students were aware of the object in each case!
There were three ways that preapprentices difficulties attributed to their levels of awareness
of the objects of pipe trades production became evident. The first was when they sought
clarification about the physical features of particular types of pipe assemblies. The second was
when they sought help with or made an error in relating the component measurements
indicated on pipe assembly drawings to actual pipes. The third was when they made an
incorrect generalization about a measurement on a type of pipe fitting. Examples are provided
below when episodes of difficulty attributed to multiple sources are discussed.
The preapprentices difficulties attributed to their levels of awareness of the pipe trades
mathematics thinking behind the design and fabrication of the material objects of pipe trades
production were evidenced in a number of ways as well. These included difficulties in:

&
&

&

Relating the measurement values given in mathematical calculations or operations to the

measurements of corresponding parts of piping objects, and vice versa;
Seeing the geometric organization of piping objects in order to determine unknown
measurement values: for example, knowing where to superimpose right triangles on an
offset pipe configuration (as shown in Fig. 1) in order to carry out necessary trigonometric
calculations; and
Making sense of the reasoning behind particular pipe trades arithmetic computations after
these had been introduced and explained in class;

as well as in students use of particularly inefficient mathematical procedures, inappropriate

procedures, or omission of essential steps in their calculations.
6.2 Awareness of the semiotic tools associated with pipe trades mathematics and production
Approximately one third of the preapprentices difficulties (47 of 129) were attributed to their
novice levels of awareness of the semiotic tools used in pipe trades mathematics and
production. These included difficulties with pipe trades symbols and terminology as well as
difficulties using the information provided in the industry standard reference handbook used
throughout the course. Specific examples included (a) a students interpretation of 8 12 as
eight-and-a-half feet instead of 8 ft and in.; (b) a student writing the measurement value 1
11
11
7 11
16 as 1 7 16 , not recognizing that 7 16 signifies a single value; (c) students having
difficulties reading fractions of an inch on their measuring tapes; and (d) students being
unaware of information to simplify their calculations that was readily available for them in
their reference materials. An instance of the last type of example occurred when some students
calculated the volume of a very large pipe, with the length of more than 100 ft, in cubic inches
using the inside pipe diameter, read from a reference table in their handbook before they
converted this to gallons; whereas they could have more easily used the gallons per foot value
for this size of pipe provided in another column on the same reference table and simply
multiplied this amount by the given length.
In 12 of the 13 cases where two sources of students difficulty were implicated (included in
the above tallies) the sources identified were their novice levels of awareness of the semiotic
tools they were using as well as their novice levels of awareness of the piping objects they
were working on. Examples included (a) a student misinterpreting a dimension line on a
technical drawing as part of a pipe assembly object; (b) a student asking why it was necessary
to calculate the length of the hypotenuse on the drawing of an offset pipe assembly when the
hypotenuse line represented one of the pipe component lengths that was required; and (c)

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

171

students being unaware that the value they had calculated was, indeed, reasonablein this
case the enormous weight of a 100-ft long, 12-in. diameter iron pipe, filled with water.
6.3 Other sources of difficulty
The remaining difficulties account for less than one sixth of the total number observed and
were attributed to one of three sources: pipe trades mathematical norms, awareness of common
mathematical objects, or previous school mathematics experiences. Difficulties attributed to
preapprentices novice levels of awareness of the norms used in pipe trades mathematics
accounted for 10 of these. These were evidenced when individuals sought clarification of, or
did not attend to (a) rounding off final lengths and angles in their calculations so that their
results would be within required tolerances, (b) the standard bend radius of manufactured pipe
elbows used in welded pipe assemblies (1.5 times the pipe diameter), or (c) the standard gap of
3
32 required between components before assembly in welded pipe assemblies.
Preapprentices difficulties attributed to their level of awareness or objectification of
common mathematical objects, including mathematical relationships and tools commonly
associated with school mathematics, accounted for seven of the remaining instances of
difficulty. These were evidenced when individuals required assistance to (a) identify properties
of basic geometric shapes, (b) interpret the meaning of common algebraic notation when it
appeared in pipe trades-specific measurement formulas, (c) operate a basic scientific calculator,
or (d) solve for a missing side length in a right triangle, given the measures of one side and one
acute angle.
Finally, there were three instances, all in the first week of the course, when preapprentices
expressed having difficulty being with, or relating to, the pipe trades mathematics work they
were doing. In all of these cases, their difficulties were attributed to previous negative
experience of mathematics in school. While providing only a glimpse of these students
subjectivities in relationship to the mathematics at this early stage of their pipe trades training,
these examples, nevertheless, provide valuable clues to this dimension of the preapprentices
experience as learners. One student, while finishing his calculations for a rolling offset with my
help, explained, Its easier than I thought. When prompted to explain what it was that was
difficult initially about this exercise, this student confided, Its just, whenever I hear
Pythagorean, or squared and things like that, it sounds hard to me. So it [the task at hand]
gets more difficult! After working with me to visualize the right triangles necessary to carry
out the trigonometry calculations to solve the pipe lengths for the parallel offset pipe assembly
shown in Fig. 1, another student explained, Im just used to doing the rote learning from
school. This sentiment was echoed on another day when, in the course of asking for help, this
same individual explained:
I cant visualize. Im good on formulas. So all I know is, I made up my formula table [a
set of algorithms that this student had created as a guide to use for various screwed pipe
fitting calculations]. () I know its easy if you just look at it and see it. But Im caught
up in going, okay, step one I have to do this, step two I do this, step three I have to do
this. But Im not understanding why Im doing it, Im just doing it.... Im not looking at
the damned picture, and I should be looking at the picture.
These comments suggest instances of conflicted or, at best, tenuous relationships with the
mathematical aspects of their preapprenticeship work. They had significant potential to
influence the ways in which these preapprentices engaged with the mathematics in pipe trades
training, as well as their sense of ease and their success in doing so.

172

L. LaCroix

7 Discussion
This study provides a detailed analysis of the nature of mathematical activity and sources of
students difficulties when doing mathematics within a skilled trades training programa
largely unexplored area within mathematics education research. Sociocultural perspectives
highlight the unique and culturally situated dimensions of this form of workplace mathematics
within the broader context of pipe trades production activity.
Within the target pipe trades preapprenticeship program, the pencil-and-paper exercises that
made up the preapprentices classroom mathematical activity all served the requirements of a
limited number of well-defined objects of workplace production. The results of the great
majority of the mathematical operations undertaken corresponded to the physical measurements of these objects. This relationship was reinforced through the organization of the
preapprenticeship coursework: The fabrication of particular forms of piping objects in the
workshop followed immediately from the introduction of the related mathematics in the
classroom.
This preapprenticeship training program, like the college components of the formal apprenticeship programs in each of the individual pipe trades, targeted standard forms of
workplace production practice including mathematics. The preapprentices mathematical
activity involved the ubiquitous presence of pipe trades-specific objects of production; specific
terminology, symbols, print resources, algebraic formulas, algorithms, and forms of representation; other tools; norms of production; as well as the more general workplace goals of
working reliably and efficiently. Furthermore, the predominant number system (the discrete set
of binary fractions), the computation methodology, and the empirical basis of mathematical
validation used all reflected the practical demands and constraints of material workplace
production in the pipe trades. This thorough penetration of pipe trades-specific mediating
elements within the apprentices mathematical activity uniquely distinguishes this form of
workplace mathematics practice and thinking from that found in formal school mathematics
classes and in other forms of workplace activity.
The preapprenticeship program provided students with a quick overview of pipe trades
methods with high stakes evaluation, given that the students had to achieve specified levels of
performance on course requirements as a means of securing positions of employment within
the pipe trades at a time when they had no pipe trades workplace experience to draw upon.
This, together with the particularized form of workincluding the mathematicsundertaken
within this program, called for the preapprentices to conform to the established ways of
working that they were being taught. In other words, these circumstances called for students
to fit in and not be critical. While not an explicit focus of the empirical analysis here, the
students subjectification as dutiful subjects under these circumstances, including their ways of
being with the pipe trades mathematics they were doing, was, undeniably, a significant part of
their enculturation into the pipe trades at this point in their training. This is similar, in some
ways, to Roths (2012, this issue) account of the subjectification of electrician apprentices,
although there was no sense from the preapprentices, their instructor, or the experienced fourth
year plumbing apprentices that I engaged with as part of my research that any parts within this
training activity amounted to putting in time, as Roth reported. All of the preapprentice
coursework was perceived as targeted towards their being able to work productively on the job.
The vast majority of the mathematics-related difficulties that the preapprentices encountered
(119 of 129) were attributed to their novice levels of awareness of pipe trades mathematics and
pipe trades production activity including (a) mathematical objects of pipe trades work, (b)
semiotic tools specific to these trades, and (c) norms of pipe trades practice. This is not
surprising, given that mathematics in the workplace is inextricably tied to particular objects

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

173

and goals of workplace production, and that workers understanding of specific forms of
workplace mathematics co-emerges with their understanding of the objects of workplace
production (Roth et al., 2012). Also, the frequency of students difficulties related to their
awareness of commonly used or school mathematics skills and relationships was comparatively
small (7 of 129 difficulties) and, clearly, not a major problem for them in the bigger picture.
Together, these findings suggest that the source of the preapprentices difficulties was rarely a
lack of school mathematics skills. Their ready access to pocket calculators and their ability to
use these effectively to carry out frequent computations certainly contributed to this result.

8 Implications and considerations for trades training

The training format of the preapprenticeship programa relatively short but intensive standalone program, taught by an experienced tradesperson, and which integrated classroom and
practical components as a prelude to entering the workplaceappeared to be quite successful.
All of the students were highly motivated, actively and meaningfully engaged with their
coursework, and all were successful in meeting the program exit requirements, including those
requirements pertaining to pipe trades mathematics. This success suggests that a similar
approach to workplace training could be useful in other contexts, particularly for developing
students workplace mathematics skills. However, it must be emphasized that the mathematics
component of this preapprenticeship course focused on skills required for becoming
credentialed as a tradesperson in the pipe trades. No claims can be made directly from the
findings of this study about the fit between the mathematics addressed (which reflected that of
the formal provincial syllabi for pipe trades apprenticeship accreditation in Canada) and the
full range of mathematics skills needed on the job in these trades. It should be noted, however,
that provincial apprenticeship curricula were written by industry experts with intimate awareness of workplace requirements. Further research to investigate ways that apprentices mathematical practices and thinking develop in the workplace and the alignment of these with the
progression of mathematics addressed within formal apprenticeship coursework has potential
to provide useful insights for informing the design of workplace mathematics training.
The findings from this study exemplify the inseparability of workplace mathematics
practices and workplace production activity. Paraphrasing Wedege (2000), workplace mathematics competence involves the integration of mathematical knowledge with particular workplace practices and forms of work organization, and also includes a readiness to act. This
suggests that it would be beneficial for students in workplace training to have their attention
drawn explicitly to the mathematically pertinent details of the objects, tools, norms, and goals
of workplace production prior to, or coincident with, focusing on specific workplace mathematics practices. This aligns with Akkermans (2011) finding, in her analysis of boundary
crossing between culturalhistorical activities, that the distinctive features of different activities
can easily remain implicit for individuals moving between them, and that drawing explicit
attention to and contrasting these features can trigger productive dialogical engagement. In the
present study, this pertains to preapprentices transition from their prior workplace mathematics practices and school mathematics to pipe trades preapprenticeship mathematics.
The mediating influence of negative expectations about doing mathematics that some
preapprentices carried with them from their school mathematics experience was identified as
a source of difficulty. This raises questions about how best to support the continued development of students productive mathematical subjectivities in workplace training generally, and
what goals would be most culturally appropriate in this regard. Further exploration of students
developing mathematical subjectivities in workplace training could serve to determine what

174

L. LaCroix

effects existing training programs contribute in this regard, and provide a basis for consideration of alternative possibilities if warranted.
The findings from this study also suggest that mathematics instruction in trades training
could benefit from close collaboration between trades specialists and mathematics educators.
Throughout the preapprenticeship course, mathematics was presented to students in an
instrumental fashion, much as other aspects of workplace production were taught. A mathematics education perspective, with students objectification of important workplace mathematical practices and conceptual connections as its goal, could inform the design and implementation of teaching materials and classroom teaching approaches. Of course, this would require
that the mathematics educators involved become deeply aware, themselves, of the workplace
production activities and constituent forms of workplace mathematics to be addressed. While
this point has been made elsewhere (e.g., Gillespie, 2000; Hoyles et al. 2010), the present
study provides some indication of the scope of the workplace mathematicsproduction activity
connections that are needed in trades training to help students to become effective and
confident with workplace mathematics.
The findings from this study reveal the multi-dimensionality of workplace mathematics
competence. As mentioned earlier, all but one of the preapprentices were secondary school
graduates (which involved a minimum of three mathematics courses in most, if not all cases),
and problems with school mathematics skills were implicated in only a few instances as they
completed their assigned mathematics-related coursework. With this in mind, implications
from this study for secondary school mathematics programs intended for students entering a
particular trade or trade training program will be similar to those outlined above for workplace
training programs. For students in general or nonspecific workplace mathematics courses, the
implications of this study and others (e.g., Wake, 2014; Williams & Wake, 2007a) suggest that
students would benefit from becoming aware of the kinds of practical and situated dimensions
of workplace mathematics practices generally. Some suggestions include:

&

&

&

Making workplace semiotic tools and technology from select trades mathematics practices
(e.g., formulas, algorithms, reference tables, measurement tools) objects of investigation to
familiarize students with these kinds of resources and to provide them with experience in
making sense of and using them;
Introducing case studies of mathematics practices and problems from various skilled
trades, along with some of the practical considerations and norms of corresponding
workplace mathematics practices such as required tolerances for measurements and the
need to attend to efficiencies of time and the cost of materials during production; and
Using shop (technical training) courses at the secondary school level, where students are
often immersed within contexts of material production, as a venue for introducing
workplace mathematics methods, related semiotic tools and norms, and the utility of
particular ways of doing workplace mathematics, as well as the relation of all of these to
workplace production practices.

Finally, this study suggests other avenues for research to inform our understanding of
workplace mathematics practices and learning. Among these are (a) further study of mathematics practices and learning in other workplace training programs, and with other populations
of students, to determine how the nature of mathematics activities and students experiences of
doing mathematics vary across diverse programs and settings; (b) further study of students
subjective experiences of doing mathematics in workplace training as means for developing
more detailed and nuanced understandings of the sources of their mathematics-related difficulties; and (c) examination of the tensions and contradictions that students experience

Mathematical activity in pipe trades training

175

between the mathematics in their trades training coursework and in the on-the-job components
of their training given, as Roth (2012, this issue) shows, the potential for significant misalignment between these two contexts.
Acknowledgement This article is a result of research funded by The Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada (SSHRC). I wish to thank the pipe trades preapprentices and course instructor who were the
subjects of this study for their willingness and openness to engage in this research endeavour with me, Sue Grecki for
her valuable assistance and insights during fieldwork, and Bill Evans and Mick Bryant for generously sharing their
technical expertise during the preparation of the manuscript. Finally, I would like to thank the reviewers for their
helpful comments and, especially, Gail FitzSimons and Arthur Bakker for their valuable feedback on earlier drafts.

References
Akkerman, S. F. (2011). Learning at boundaries. International Journal of Educational Research, 50, 2125.
Bakker, A., & Akkerman, S. (2013). A boundary-crossing approach to support students integration of statistical
and work-related knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics. doi: 10.1007/s10649-013-9517-z
Bakker, A., Groenveld, D., Wijers, M., Akkerman, S., & Gravemeijer, K. (2012). Proportional reasoning in the
laboratory: An intervention study in vocational education. Educational Studies in Mathematics. doi: 10.
1007/s10649-012-9393-y
Eberhard, M. (2000). Forms of mathematical knowledge relating to measurement in vocational training for the
building industry. In A. Bessot & J. Ridgway (Eds.), Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 37
51). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
FitzSimons, G., Mlcek, S., Hull, O., & Wright, C. (2005). Learning numeracy on the job: A case study of
chemical handling and spraying. Adelaide, Australia: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.
Forman, S. L., & Steen, L. A. (2000). Bringing school and workplace together. In A. Bessot & J. Ridgway (Eds.),
Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 8386). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Fownes, L., Thompson, E., & Evetts, J. (2002). Numeracy at work. Burnaby, BC, Canada: SkillPlan-BC
Construction Industry Skills Improvement Council.
Frankland, T. W. (1984). The pipe fitters and pipe welders handbook. New York, NY: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.
Gillespie, J. (2000). The integration of mathematics into vocational courses. In A. Bessot & J. Ridgway (Eds.),
Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 5364). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Hahn, C. (2011). Linking academic knowledge and professional experience in using statistics: A design
experiment for business school students. Educational Studies in Mathematics. doi: 10.1007/s10649-0119363-9
Hoyles, C., Noss, R., Kent, P., & Bakker, A. (2010). Improving mathematics at work: The need for technomathematical literacies. New York, NY: Routledge.
Industry Training Authority of British Columbia. (2009). Plumber program outline. Victoria, BC, Canada:
Queens Printer of British Columbia.
Jurdak, M., & Shahin, I. (2001). Problem solving activity in the workplace and the school: The case of
constructing solids. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47, 297315.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Leontev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality (M. J. Hall, Trans.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Martin, L. C., & LaCroix, L. N. (2008). Images and the growth of understanding of mathematics-for-working.
Canadian Journal for Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(2), 121139.
Martin, L. C., LaCroix, L. N., & Fownes, L. (2005). Folding back and the growth of mathematical understanding
in workplace training. Adults Learning Mathematics, 1(1), 1935. Retrieved from http://www.alm-online.
net/images/ALM/journals/almij_volume1_1_june2005.pdf. Accessed 1 Sep 2013
Masingila, J. O. (1993). Learning from mathematics practice in out-of-school situations. For the Learning of
Mathematics, 13(2), 1822.
Masingila, J. O. (1994). Mathematics practice in carpet laying. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 25, 430462.
Noss, R., Hoyles, C., & Pozzi, S. (2000). Working knowledge: Mathematics in use. In A. Bessot & D. Ridgway
(Eds.), Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 1736). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Pozzi, S., Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1998). Tools in practice, mathematics in use. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 36, 105343.

176

L. LaCroix

Radford, L. (2003). On culture and mind. A post-Vygotskian semiotic perspective, with an example from Greek
mathematical thought. In M. Anderson, A. Senz-Ludlow, S. Zellweger, & V. Cifarelli (Eds.), Educational
perspectives on mathematics as semiosis: From thinking to interpreting to knowing (pp. 4979). Ottawa:
Legas.
Radford, L. (2008a). Culture and cognition: Towards an anthropology of mathematical thinking. In L. English
(Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (2nd ed., pp. 439464). New York, NY:
Routledge, Taylor, and Francis.
Radford, L. (2008b). The ethics of being and knowing: Towards a cultural theory of learning. In L. Radford, G.
Schubring, & F. Seeger (Eds.), Semiotics in mathematics education: Epistemology, history, classroom and
culture (pp. 215234). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Radford, L. (2008c). Iconicity and contraction: A semiotic investigation of forms of algebraic generalizations of
patterns in different contexts. ZDMThe International Journal on Mathematics Education, 40(1), 8396.
Radford, L. (2009). Why do gestures matter? Sensuous cognition and the palpability of mathematical meanings.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 111126.
Ridgway, J. (2000). The mathematical needs of engineering apprentices. In A. Bessot & D. Ridgway (Eds.),
Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 189197). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Roth, W.-M. (2005). Mathematical inscriptions and the reflexive elaboration of understanding: An ethnography
of graphing and numeracy in a fish hatchery. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7, 75109.
Roth, W.-M. (2012). Rules of bending, bending rules: The geometry of conduit bending in college and
workplace. Educational Studies in Mathematics. doi: 10.1007/s10649-011-9376-4
Roth, W.-M. (2014). Reading activity, consciousness, personality dialectically: Cultural-historical activity theory
and the centrality of society. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 21(1), 420. doi:10.1080/10749039.2013.771368.
Roth, W.-M., & Lee, Y. J. (2007). Vygotskys neglected legacy: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of
Educational Research, 77, 186232.
Roth, W.-M., Radford, L., & LaCroix, L. (2012). Working with cultural-historical activity theory. Forum
Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(2), Art. 23. Retrieved from http://
nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1202232. Accessed 15 Jun 2012.
Triantafillou, C., & Potari, D. (2010). Mathematics practices in a technological workplace: The role of tools.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 275294.
Vygotsky, L. (1979). Consciousness as a problem in the psychology of behavior. Soviet Psychology, 17(4), 335.
Wake, G. (2014). Making sense of and with mathematics: The interface between academic mathematics and
mathematics in practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics. doi:10.1007/s10649-014-9540-8.
Wedege, T. (2000). Mathematics knowledge as a vocational qualification. In A. Bessot & J. Ridgway (Eds.),
Education for mathematics in the workplace (pp. 12736). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007a). Black boxes in workplace mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
64, 317343.
Williams, J., & Wake, G. (2007b). Metaphors and modes in translation between college and workplace
mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64, 345371.
Williams, J., Wake, G., & Boreham, N. (2001). College mathematics and workplace practice: An activity theory
perspective. Research in Mathematics Education, 3, 6984.
Zevenbergen, R., & Zevenbergen, K. (2004). Numeracy practices of young workers. In M. J. Hines & A. B.
Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education, 4 (pp. 505512). Norway: Bergen University College.
Zevenbergen, R., & Zevenbergen, K. (2009). The numeracies of boatbuilding: New numeracies shaped by
workplace technologies. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 183206.