A discourse was construed through the use of the term the language, such as:

Språkets2 betydelse i matematikundervisning	The importance of the language in mathematics education (University of Gävle, 2020).
Språkets roll	The role of the language (Kristianstad University, 2023).

The descriptions emphasise language as a tool for learning mathematics, but do not specify which language is being referred to. By filling in assumptions and inferences in these excerpts, we recognise the definite form of the language, which suggests a particular language, but without explicit clarification. This ambiguity allows for multiple readings; it could refer to students’ mother tongues or any language within their broader linguistic repertoires. Given the context of Swedish education, it is assumed that the term refers to Swedish, the official language of instruction. This points toward a cultural and linguistic homogeneity as a norm in mathematics classrooms. Furthermore, in both citations, language is positioned as the central subject. It is represented as a key factor in mathematics education, but it remains passive by influencing the learning rather than acting. The identity of the multilingual students is positioned as learners who must adapt to the language of instruction to succeed in mathematics.

Another discourse was construed through the word multilingualism in the following descriptions:

Redogöra för flerspråkiga elevers kunskapsutveckling och begreppsbildning i matematik.	Describe the knowledge development and concept formation in mathematics of multilingual students (University of Borås, 2023b).
Vidare belyses hur val av arbetssätt kan påverka flerspråkiga elevers möjlighet till matematiklärande. Kursen ger också en beredskap att tillämpa olika arbetsformer.	Furthermore, the course highlights how the choice of working methods can affect multilingual students’ opportunities for learning mathematics. The course also prepares students to apply different working methods (University of Borås, 2023b).

The first description suggests that multilingual students have unique ways of acquiring knowledge compared to the ‘general’ mathematics student, highlighting a differentiated perception of their understanding of mathematical concepts. Although the focus is on multilingual students and their development in mathematics, they are portrayed as passive learners, affected by external factors like teaching methods, rather than as active agents in their own learning. Using the fill-in tool, it remains unsaid that multilingual students may face linguistic barriers in accessing mathematical content, requiring teachers to adapt their methods to support them. The teachers’ identities, implied by the indefinite subject, are positioned as active and responsible agents in selecting and applying appropriate methods, in relation to the multilingual students’ identities, who are passive recipients of instruction. The second description underscores the importance of didactical choices, particularly in how they influence the learning opportunities of multilingual students, as if these students require specialised methods. While this description suggests that the course should include examples to illustrate this approach, it lacks concrete guidance on implementation.

Another way to address multilingualism is by using the phrase “first- and second-language perspective” in relation to “subject-specific language”:

Visa kunskap om och förmåga att beakta sambandet mellan det ämnesspecifika språket och elevers kunskapsutveckling ur ett första- och andraspråksperspektiv.

Demonstrate knowledge of and ability to consider the relationship between subject-specific language and students’ knowledge development from a first- and second-language perspective (Malmö University, 2023).

Even though this excerpt addresses first and second languages, we interpret it as separating students’ languages into isolated entities. Here, the language of instruction is positioned as necessary for success, particularly in relation to “subject-specific language” and “students’ knowledge development”. The approach of separating languages stands in contrast to a translanguaging approach, in which languages are viewed holistically as part of a unified linguistic repertoire (e.g., García & Li, 2014). Through the use of the fill-in tool, students with different linguistic backgrounds may experience unequal access to mathematics. This excerpt enacts the identity of the professional, responsible, pedagogically and linguistically competent teacher, while also positioning students as learners whose success depends on the teacher’s ability to address linguistic issues in mathematics.

Multilingualism is also evident when it is positioned in contrast to the language of instruction:

Språkets betydelse i matematikundervisning, både matematik som språklig praktik och flerspråkighet i matematikundervisning.	The importance of the language in mathematics teaching, both mathematics as a linguistic practice and multilingualism in mathematics teaching (University of Gävle, 2020).
Visa förmåga att reflektera över språkets roll i matematikundervisningen och flerspråkselevers lärande i matematik.	Demonstrate the ability to reflect on the role of the language in mathematics teaching and the learning of multilingual students in mathematics (Jönköping University, 2022).

The first excerpt starts by pointing to “the language,” which, by filling in assumptions, we interpret as referring to Swedish. The importance of this language is then divided into “mathematics as a linguistic practice” and “multilingualism in mathematics teaching.” The former is interpreted to referring to the use of “the language” as a communicative tool for mediating mathematical knowledge. This highlights the role of the Swedish language in supporting interaction and understanding. The latter focuses on the importance of the Swedish language for multilingual students’ learning in mathematics. In this case, multilingual students are expected to acquire Swedish to succeed in mathematics education. This way of framing positions Swedish as the norm and contributes to a cultural and linguistic homogeneity Discourse. Similarly, the second excerpt emphasises the role of “the language” in mathematics in relation to multilingual students’ learning. Hence, a monolingual approach is implicitly present, signalling a symbolic action in relation to multilingualism. Following this, a discourse of symbolic multilingualism is construed.

Another discourse is construed by the use of the wordings “students in need” and “students’ differences”. These wordings position the students as students who deviate from a norm:

Differentiering av matematikundervisning i årskurserna 4-6, med speciellt fokus på elever i behov av extra anpassningar, elever i behov av särskilda utmaningar samt elever med olika språkliga och kulturella bakgrunder.	Differentiation of mathematics teaching in Grades 4–6, with a special focus on students in need of extra adaptations, students in need of special challenges, and students with different linguistic and cultural backgrounds (Mälardalen University, 2023)
Vidare behandlas elevers olikheter i relation till exempelvis genus, klass, etnicitet och normalitet/avvikelse och dess inverkan på lärande och undervisning i matematik.	Furthermore, students’ differences are addressed in relation to, for example, gender, class, ethnicity, and normality/deviation and their impact on learning and teaching in mathematics (Linköping University, 2013)

In the first description, the emphasis is on compensatory demands directed at students framed as in need. These needs may be interpreted in various ways: as special educational needs, additional challenges, or difficulties related to limited proficiency in the language of instruction. This framing positions them as deviating from the norm and as requiring special attention from the teacher. This suggests that deviation from the linguistic majority norm is a problem to be addressed. Consequently, the discourse might contribute to a cultural and linguistic homogeneity Discourse in which multilingual students require specialised knowledge and skills to be effectively supported in their education. The subject tool highlights how the teacher is positioned as an active agent, expected to make pedagogical decisions and adapt instruction based on student differences.

The second description enhances differentiation aspects by using the word ethnicity, along with normality/deviation, which impact learning and teaching mathematics. By filling in assumptions, the description implicitly frames the students’ differences as an issue that the education system must deal with, rather than as an asset that can enrich the mathematics classroom. There is also an assumption that social categories shape mathematics education. Students’ identities are positioned as passive, while educators’ identities are positioned as active and expected to respond to these differences. This enactment of identities leads to the construction of a teacher who reflects on how broader social structures influence learning and is expected to take on the role of facilitator. It also assumes that mathematics education is not neutral, but is shaped by societal norms, with students’ differences playing a central role in teaching and learning.

The discourse “students who deviate” was also framed through a deficit perspective on cultural diversity:

Kunna redogöra för begreppet särskilda utbildningsbehov i matematik (SUM) samt kulturella och sociala aspekter på lärande i matematik ur ett specialpedagogiskt perspektiv.

Be able to describe the concept of special educational needs in mathematics (SUM), as well as cultural and social aspects of learning in mathematics from a special educational perspective (Linnaeus University, 2014)

This description shows the importance of considering cultural and social aspects from a special education perspective. The cultural aspects can be assumed to include the challenges multilingual students face in understanding mathematical concepts within the Swedish context due to cultural differences in interpreting and working with mathematical concepts. This perspective positions cultural and linguistic diversity as potential obstacles to mathematics learning, framing multilingual students’ identities as requiring special education support to overcome these challenges. Hence, the special education perspective may unintentionally reinforce a discourse of cultural and linguistic homogeneity by treating diversity as a deviation from the norm.

The cultural and linguistic homogeneity Discourse is narrated by a figured world where the Swedish language is seen as superior, and other languages are viewed as obstacles that the education system must compensate for. The educators’ identities are portrayed as experts and helpers, while students with multilingual backgrounds are seen through a deficit perspective, lacking the necessary knowledge and requiring support. This creates a power imbalance, positioning the teacher as the authority and the student as the one who shall adapt. While such power dynamics are inherent to most educational settings, the Discourse reinforces a particular asymmetry where the teacher is construed as the active, knowledgeable agent responsible for recognising and addressing student differences, whereas students are portrayed as passive recipients without influence. Languages are treated as separate reinforcing a monolingual norm where Swedish is the only legitimate language for learning. In this figured world, teacher educators shall promote a compensatory pedagogy, encouraging pre-service teachers to adopt it in mathematics classrooms. This emphasises conformity to the dominant language and culture.

A discourse was construed by the use of the word “inclusion” in the curriculum, such as:

Lärarutbildningen […] skall baseras på ett inkluderande perspektiv, vilket innebär strävan efter att lärarstudenterna utvecklar förmågor att anpassa verksamheten utifrån alla elevers förutsättningar, behov och olikheter.

Teacher education […] should be based on an inclusive perspective, which means striving for teacher students to develop the ability to adapt activities based on all students’ conditions, needs, and differences (Jönköping University, 2024)

In mathematics education course syllabi inclusion in relation to students’ differences was used by descriptions such as:

Studenten ska utveckla förmåga att genomföra en varierad, lustfylld, meningsfull och inkluderande matematikundervisning om aritmetik som tar hänsyn till elevers olika intressen och förutsättningar att lära matematik.

The student should develop the ability to conduct varied, enjoyable, meaningful, and inclusive arithmetic teaching that takes students’ different interests and conditions for learning mathematics into account (Halmstad University, 2022)

Inclusion was also used by relating it to all students in different phrasings such as “each student”, “every student” and “all students”:

Visa fördjupad förmåga att skapa förutsättningar för alla elever att lära och utvecklas.

Demonstrate an advanced ability to create conditions for all students to learn and develop (University of Gothenburg, 2020).

When encountering ‘all students’ and connotating phrases, we filled in and assumed that they are intended to include culturally and linguistically diverse students. The assumptions and inferences in these excerpts show that they promote an inclusive and student-centered approach to mathematics teaching, where the teacher is positioned as an active agent who responds to learners’ differences. In this context, students’ identities are construed as diverse individuals with unique potential. This way of expressing inclusion by emphasising every individual student is interpreted as aligning with a cultural and linguistic plurality Discourse, where mathematics teaching is expected to ensure equitable learning opportunities for all learners. However, the discourse remains vague about how such inclusion should be implemented in the classroom.

The discourse integrated multilingualism was construed by descriptions such as:

Visa kunskap om flerspråkighet i relation till lärande och ha kunskap om språk- och kunskapsutvecklande arbetssätt så att lärande möjliggörs oberoende av elevers bakgrund samt visa kunskap om hur sådan undervisning kan organiseras i praktiken.

Demonstrate knowledge of multilingualism in relation to learning and have knowledge of language and knowledge-developing approaches so that learning is enabled regardless of students’ backgrounds, and demonstrate knowledge of how such teaching can be organised in practice (University of Gothenburg, 2020)

This description explicitly acknowledges multilingualism in relation to learning by presenting a specific pedagogical approach, “language- and knowledge-developing approaches”. Although this approach could risk reinforcing a cultural and linguistic homogeneity perspective centring the dominant language, the phrase “enabled regardless of students’ backgrounds” counteracts this risk. Furthermore, the description addresses not only the “what” but also the “how”, emphasizing the importance of equipping pre-service teachers to apply these practices in their future teaching. By using the subject tool, the teacher is positioned as an active agent, implying both responsibility and initiative. The policy constructs the identity of a linguistically aware and inclusive teacher as a professional who understands multilingualism and is capable of translating that understanding into equitable teaching practices, particularly in relation to the students’ backgrounds.

Another discourse is construed through the use of the terms: students’ interests, conditions, and experiences. These wordings assume that students come to school with experiences shaped by their cultural and linguistic backgrounds, among other things, for example:

Under utbildningen ska studenten utveckla medvetenhet om och förhållningssätt till värdegrund, hållbar utveckling, jämställdhet, kulturell mångfald och människors skilda utgångspunkter och erfarenheter i enlighet med rådande styrdokument.	During the education, the student should develop awareness and attitudes towards core values, sustainable development, gender equality, cultural diversity, and people’s different perspectives and experiences in accordance with current governing documents (Kristianstad University, 2020)
Visa förmåga att anpassa sig till elevers tidigare kunskaper och intressen samt verksamhetens behov.	Demonstrate the ability to adapt to students’ prior knowledge and interests, as well as the needs of the educational setting (University of Borås, 2023a)
Kursens fokus är att studenterna utvecklar en fördjupad förståelse av grundläggande matematik och fördjupade kunskaper om hur olika kvaliteter i elevers lärande kan bedömas samt hur olikheter i elevers lärande av matematik kan ses som en tillgång.	The course focuses on students developing an in-depth understanding of fundamental mathematics and advanced knowledge of how different qualities in students’ learning can be assessed, as well as how differences in students’ learning of mathematics can be seen as an asset (University of Borås, 2023b).

These descriptions emphasise adapting mathematics teaching to the diversity, rather than adapting students to fit into the teaching. They highlight students’ diversity, interests, prior knowledge, and differences as assets that can enhance teaching. By filling in assumptions and inferences in these descriptions, we recognise an attempt to challenge the homogeneity norm in mathematics education by valuing cultural and linguistic diversity. Furthermore, the discourse promotes a norm where teaching is about creating meaningful and accessible learning for all.

However, using the fill-in tool, the phrase ‘can be seen’ (kan ses) suggests that prevailing societal assumptions may still frame students’ differences as problems. The focus is on seeing these differences as assets, yet there is no explanation of how or why they should be recognised, used, or integrated as resources in the mathematics classroom.

Another way to address students with assets is by recognising that mathematics is shaped by diverse cultures; therefore, mathematics teaching should reflect this diversity:

Matematiska influenser från olika kulturer.	Mathematical influences from different cultures (Uppsala University, 2022)
Geometriska grundbegrepp i ett historiskt och kulturellt perspektiv samt om personer av betydelse för matematikens utveckling.	Basic concepts of geometry from a historical and cultural perspective, as well as about individuals significant to the development of mathematics. (Jönköping University, 2022).

Using the fill-in tool, there is an underlying assumption that mathematics is understood as not culturally neutral and its development has been shaped by global cultural history. Another possible assumption is a willingness to challenge Eurocentric narratives in mathematics education. These descriptions present mathematics as a cultural practice and affirms the contributions of various cultures. In doing so, it positions different ways of knowing and doing mathematics as valuable resources. Mathematical knowledge is not confined to Western traditions alone. Similarly, the second formulation acknowledges the role of mathematics in a broader cultural context by highlighting how mathematical knowledge has been shaped by contributions from diverse cultures and individuals.

The cultural and linguistic plurality Discourse is narrated by a figured world where teachers are expected to adapt their teaching to meet the diverse needs of students, rather than expecting students to conform to the existing system. While teachers still hold a central role in this Discourse, they are seen as facilitators, and their didactical choices are crucial in shaping education that is responsive to all students’ backgrounds. Students are active participants with their own interests, conditions, and needs, which influence both teaching and learning. This perspective decentralises the normative assumptions of a dominant language of instruction and instead emphasises multiple ways of teaching and learning mathematics, drawing on cultural and linguistic diverse experiences. Language remains a key tool for communication, but multilingualism is recognised as an integrated and valued resource within the educational context. Teacher educators in this figured world go beyond theoretical discussions of multilingualism in mathematics education, providing practical examples for pre-service teachers on how to implement transformative and critical pedagogies. These pedagogies aim to ensure that all students are recognised and acknowledged, regardless of their language and cultural background. This approach aligns with what can be described as a recognition pedagogy, which actively acknowledges, values, and legitimises cultural and linguistic diversity in mathematics education.

We identified three tensions between the six discourses. The first tension found is between the discourse “all students” and the discourse “the language”. As Table 3 shows, “all students” is a dominant discourse, which we attribute to the Higher Education Ordinance (SFS 1993:100) and the Swedish Higher Education Act (SFS 1992:1434) emphasising inclusion of all students across all educational practices. However, the policy documents also promote a discourse of “the language,” which positions Swedish as the primary and necessary language for learning and succeeding in mathematics. This creates a tension as, while the discourse of “all students” suggests that all learners should be equally supported and included, the discourse of “the language” implicitly prioritises students who already have proficiency in Swedish. Consequently, multilingual students may be disadvantaged, despite the inclusive intentions.

The second tension is between the discourse “symbolic multilingualism” and the discourse “integrated multilingualism”. The results show that multilingualism is almost entirely absent. Although the language used suggests an intention to include multilingualism in mathematics education, our analysis reveals that such inclusion is predominantly symbolic. Multilingual aspects are mentioned, ostensibly to promote inclusion, but the way they are framed, risks reinforcing othering and exclusion. Out of the 75 documents analysed, we found only one formulation in one educational curriculum that adopts an integrated multilingual approach.

The third tension found is between the discourse “students with assets” and “students who deviate.” The tension arises from whether students are recognised for their diverse contributions or framed as lacking due to limited proficiency in the instructional language. The discourse “students who deviate” portray certain students as deviating from a norm. This latter discourse tends to emphasise differentiation and othering within mathematics education. We found that the discourse of “students with assets” is clearly reflected from the educational curricula into the course syllabi, as its distribution remains consistent across both document types. In contrast, the discourse of “students who deviate” is entirely absent from the educational curricula, although it appears prominently in the mathematics education course syllabi. This suggests that mathematics teacher education is framed through a Western pedagogical lens which may undervalue alternative cultural approaches to learning.