Towards a supportive math pedagogy: Power dynamics and academic integrity considerations




Mathematics, Academic Integrity, Power, Inequity, Online Proctoring, Assessment Design, Pedagogy, Postsecondary, Canada


Mathematics is a discipline with implicit power dynamics that affects who is seen as a viable educator and learner. In this paper we explore the power dynamics of the teaching and learning of mathematics at the university level, highlighting the inequitable and exclusionary aspects of math pedagogy that can lead to academic misconduct. We argue that a supportive pedagogy that meets learners at their social location will model academic integrity and create an educational environment that is inclusive of diverse learners. The potential effect of a supportive pedagogy that keeps universal design in mind, means a reconceptualization of both learning outcomes as well as surveilled high-stakes assessments for traditionally exclusionary fields such as mathematics.

Author Biographies

Timothy Yusun, Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, University of Toronto Mississauga

Assistant Professor, Teaching Stream

Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences

University of Toronto Mississauga

Ann Gagné, Institute for the Study of University Pedagogy, Robert Gillespie Academic Skills Centre, University of Toronto Mississauga

Educational Developer

Institute for the Study of University Pedagogy

Robert Gillespie Academic Skills Centre

University of Toronto Mississauga


Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Duke University Press.

Alt, D. Assessing the connection between students’ justice experience and attitudes toward academic cheating in higher education new learning environments. J Acad Ethics 12, 113–127 (2014).

American Mathematical Society. (2019). AMS policy statement on ethical guidelines. American Mathematical Society. Retrieved October 17, 2020, from

Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Wiley.

Bertram Gallant, T. (2008). A new approach to academic integrity: The teaching and learning strategy. In Academic integrity in the twenty-first century: A teaching and learning imperative. ASHE Higher Education Report 33 (5): 1–143.

Blackwell, L.S., Trzesniewski, K.H., & Dweck, C.S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78 (1), 246-263.

Bretag, T. (2019). Contract cheating research: Implications for Canadian universities. Keynote address presented at the Canadian Symposium on Academic Integrity, Calgary.

Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. John Wiley & Sons.

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, 241-258. Greenwood.

Boylan, M. & Woolsey, I. (2015). Teacher education for social justice: Mapping identity spaces. Teaching and Teacher Education, 46, 62-71.

Burton, L. (2009). The culture of mathematics and the mathematical culture. In O. Skovsmose, P. Valero, & O. R. Christensen (Eds.), University science and mathematics education in transition (pp. 157–173). Springer US.

Canning, E.A., Meunks, K., Green, D.J., & Murphy, M.C. (2019). STEM faculty who believe ability is fixed have larger racial achievement gaps and inspire less student motivation in their classes. Science Advances, 5 (2).

Chestnut, E. K., Lei, R. F., Leslie, S.-J., & Cimpian, A. (2018). The myth that only brilliant people are good at math and its implications for diversity. Education Sciences, 8(2), 65.

Cobb, P., & Hodge, L. L. (2002). A relational perspective on issues of cultural diversity and equity as they play out in the mathematics classroom. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(2–3), 249–284.

Copur-Gencturk, Y., Cimpian, J. R., Lubienski, S. T., & Thacker, I. (2020). Teachers’ bias against the mathematical ability of female, black, and hispanic students. Educational Researcher, 49(1), 30–43.

Crossman, K. (2019). Is this in my contract?: How part-time contract faculty face barriers to reporting academic integrity breaches. Canadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity, 2(1), 32–39.

Douglas, D., & Attewell, P. (2017). School Mathematics as Gatekeeper. The Sociological Quarterly, 58(4), 648–669.

Eaton, S. E., Crossman, K., & Edino, R. (2019). Academic integrity in Canada: An annotated bibliography. Calgary: University of Calgary.

Eaton, S. E., & Edino, R. I. (2018). Strengthening the research agenda of educational integrity in Canada: A review of the research literature and call to action. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(1), 1–21.

Evans-Tokaryk, T. (2014). Academic integrity, remix culture, globalization: A Canadian case study of student and faculty perceptions of plagiarism. Across the Disciplines, 11(2).

Freeman, S., Eddy, S.L., McDonough, M., Smith, M.K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H. & Wenderoth, M.P. (2014). Active learning boosts performance in STEM courses. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111 (23) 8410-8415.

Freire, P. (1969). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

Gernsbacher, M. A., Soicher, R. N., & Becker-Blease, K. A. (2020). Four empirically based reasons not to administer time-limited tests. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 6(2), 175–190.

Gilmore, J., Maher, M., & Feldon, D. (2016). Prevalence, prevention, and pedagogical techniques: Academic integrity and ethical professional practice among STEM students. In T. Bretag (Ed.), Handbook of academic integrity (pp. 729–748). Springer.

Government of Ontario. (2020, September 23). Ontario moving to standardized online testing for students. Retrieved October 15, 2020, from

Gray, B. C. (Host). (2021). Conspiracy theorist about issues of privacy (No. 23) [Audio podcast episode]. In You got this!.

Gurung, R., & Galardi, N. (2021). Syllabus tone, more than mental health statements, influence intentions to seek help. Teaching of Psychology.

Gutiérrez, R. (2008). A “gap-gazing” fetish in mathematics education? Problematizing research on the achievement gap. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 357–364.

Gutiérrez, R. (2013). The sociopolitical turn in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 37.

Harwell, D. (2020, April 1). Mass school closures in the wake of the coronavirus are driving a new wave of student surveillance. Washington Post. Retrieved October 15, 2020, from

Hennessey, M. N., Higley, K., & Chesnut, S. R. (2012). Persuasive pedagogy: A new paradigm for mathematics education. Educational Psychology Review, 24(2), 187–204.

Holden, O., Kuhlmeier, V. A., & Norris, M. (2020). Academic integrity in online testing: A research review. PsyArXiv.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. Routledge.

International Centre for Academic Integrity. (2021). The fundamental values of academic integrity. Retrieved March 24, 2021, from

Kantayya, S. (Director). (2020) Coded bias. [Documentary]

Kerr, A. (2011). Teaching and learning in large classes at Ontario universities: An exploratory study. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

Krahn, H., & Taylor, A. (2007). “Streaming” in the 10th grade in four Canadian provinces in 2000. Education Matters: Insights on Education, Learning and Training in Canada. Statistics Canada.

Lang, J. M. (2013). Cheating lessons: Learning from academic dishonesty. Harvard University Press.

The Learning Network. (2020). What students are saying about online test proctoring. The New York Times. Retrieved October 15, 2020, from

Leonard, J., Brooks, W., Barnes-Johnson, J., & Berry, R. Q. (2010). The nuances and complexities of teaching mathematics for cultural relevance and social justice. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(3), 261–270.

Lewis, D. (2020). Gender effects on re-assessment attempts in a standards-based grading implementation. PRIMUS, 30(5), 539–551.

Louie, N. L. (2017). The culture of exclusion in mathematics education and its persistence in equity-oriented teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(5), 488–519.

Madland, C. [@colinmadland]. (2020, Sept 18). A faculty member has been asking how to stop Zoom from removing his head when he uses a virtual [Tweet]. Twitter.

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (1999). Academic integrity in honor code and non-honor code environments: A qualitative investigation. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), 211–234.

McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 219–232.

McIntosh, H. (2014). Representations of female scientists in The Big Bang Theory. Journal of Popular Film and Television, 42(4), 195–204.

Munoz, A. & Mackay, J. (2019). An online testing design choice typology towards cheating threat minimisation. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 16(3).

Noble, S. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press.

Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(1), 44–59.

Prasad, P. V. (2020). Using revision and specifications grading to develop students’ mathematical habits of mind. PRIMUS, 30(8–10), 908–925.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3) 223-231.

Rushowy, K. (2020, July 6). Ontario to end streaming in Grade 9 and change other ‘racist, discriminatory’ practices. Toronto Star.

Sanders, N., Umbal, P., & Konnelly, L. (2020). Methods for increasing equity, diversity, and inclusion in linguistics pedagogy. Proceedings of the 2020 Meeting of the Canadian Linguistics Association.

Seaton, K.A. (2019). Laying groundwork for an understanding of academic integrity in mathematics tasks. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(7), 1063-1072.

Seaton, K. (2020). Academic integrity in mathematics education: Breaking the silence. In T. Bretag (Ed.), A Research Agenda for Academic Integrity (pp. 175–186). Edward Elgar.

Su, F. (2017, March 13). Teaching tidbits: 5 reflective exam questions that will make you excited about grading. Teaching Tidbits. Retrieved October 15, 2020, from

Su, F. (2020). Mathematics for human flourishing. Yale University Press.

Swauger, S. (2020) Our bodies encoded: Algorithmic test proctoring in higher education. In J. Stommel, C. Friend, and S.M. Morris (Eds.), Critical digital pedagogy.

Thacker, E.J. (2020). Assignment outsourcing and academic literacies: Exploring the relationship. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Keele University, UK.

Theobald, E. J., Eddy, S. L., Grunspan, D. Z., Wiggins, B. L., & Crowe, A. J. (2017). Student perception of group dynamics predicts individual performance: Comfort and equity matter. PloS one, 12(7), e0181336.

Trinidad, J.E., Ngo, G.R., Nevada, A.M. & Morales, J.A. (2020) Engaging and/or effective? Students’ evaluation of pedagogical practices in higher education, College Teaching, 68 (4), 161-171.






Peer-reviewed Articles