Joubert, M. (Ed.) Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics 29(3) November 2009 From Informal Proceedings 29-3 (BSRLM) available at bsrlm.org.uk © the author - 55 Simon Says: Direction in Dialogue Jenni Ingram, Mary Briggs and Peter Johnston-Wilder University of Warwick There has been a steady increase in the quantity of mathematics education research focusing on language, discourse and interaction. A wide variety of theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches have been taken including discursive psychology, commognition, and discourse analysis. This paper explores the use of a conversation analysis approach to analyzing interactions in mathematics classrooms. In particular what this approach can tell us about the structure of interactions and the use of repair in the negotiation of mathematical meanings. Keywords: classroom discourse, conversation analysis, repair Introduction and Background Several authors have focused on language, discourse and communication in the mathematics education literature over the past twenty years. Some authors have explored the relationship between discourse and identity (Boaler, Wiliam and Zevenbergen 2000, Lee 2006), beliefs about mathematics and beliefs about teaching and learning. Others have focused on interactional strategies and the implications of these for the learning of mathematics (O'Connor and Michaels 1993). More recently, Sfard (2007) has proposed a theoretical framework which conceptualises learning mathematics as a transformation and extension of learner’s discourse. This “commognitive” framework treats a learner’s discourse as the object of learning and not just the means of learning, raising the importance of research on mathematics classroom discourse. There are many methodological approaches available in the research on discourse: discourse analysis including systemic functional linguistics, critical discourse analysis, discursive psychology and conversation analysis to name a few. This paper explores the conversation analytic approach as a means of explicating the complexity of interaction in the classroom setting. After outlining the conversation analysis methodology the notion of repair is explored in the context of two extracts taken from transcripts of whole-class interactions. Differences in the organisation of repair between the classroom contexts and everyday conversation are then examined and the implications these differences have on the learning of mathematics are discussed. Conversation analysis The origins of conversation analysis lie in the analysis of naturally occurring conversation but have been extended to include the analysis of institutional settings such as courtrooms and emergency help lines (see Drew and Heritage 1992 for more examples). McHoul (1990) used a conversation analysis approach in his study of geography classrooms and Seedhouse (1996) offers an in-depth analysis of second language classrooms. Conversation analysis (CA) as a methodology assumes that interaction is structurally organised and the goal of CA is the exposition of this structure from the perspective of the participants themselves (Levinson 1983). Consequently, claims about the existence of