Mathematical competence is widely regarded as critical for social mobility, as it plays a key role in educational advancement and the ability to access numerous career opportunities, particularly those with higher salaries. However, disparities in mathematical achievements often reflect deeper socioeconomic inequalities (Gates & Vistro-Yu, 2003). The latest PISA results (OECD, 2023) show a gap in mathematics achievement between the most advantaged and the most disadvantaged students of 93 points across OECD countries - the difference corresponding to over four years of schooling. Further - 47% of socio-economically disadvantaged students, compared to 14% of advantaged students, score below the basic level of mathematics proficiency. Historically, research has explained these achievement gaps through deficit frameworks, such as the "culture of poverty," which attribute social and educational inequalities to perceived shortcomings within individuals and communities that underperform academically (Gutiérrez & Dixon-Román, 2011). These frameworks fail to acknowledge the role of inadequate access to resources and support (Jovanović, 2017) in shaping students’ experiences and outcomes. An alternative perspective, based on Bourdieu’s (1985) framework, suggests that students from affluent backgrounds are more likely to succeed because their cultural capital and habitus—comprising habits, skills, linguistic repertoire, and behaviors—align with the expectations and practices of school mathematics, while their disadvantaged peers must adapt to an unfamiliar system. Moreover, class and gender intersect in mathematics education, creating specific barriers to participation and success for girls from disadvantaged backgrounds. Intersectional studies highlight that low-class girls are among the most disengaged from mathematics, exhibiting lower mathematical achievement and reduced STEM aspirations (Saw et al., 2018), which underscores the need to examine educational inequalities as complex social interactions.
This paper follows the line of scholars who, in advocating for more inclusive mathematics education, rely on analyzing students' mathematics identity (MI). MI shifts attention to the societal, structural, and institutional barriers, highlighting how cultural contexts and institutional and societal narratives shape students' self-perception and participation in mathematics (Radović et al., 2018). MI refers to a student’s sense of self as a member of a mathematical community, shaped by their experiences and the social interpretations of those experiences (Anderson, 2007; Wenger, 1998). This includes the narratives, available roles, and feedback from significant others, which continuously inform students’ MI. MI also interacts with other aspects of identity, such as personal traits and collective identities (e.g., class, gender, ethnicity; Eccles, 2009), facilitating identification with the subject for some, while making it challenging for others. Therefore, this perspective argues that, given mathematics education has historically favored white, middle-class males (Gates & Vistro-Yu, 2003), achievement disparities stem from barriers to identifying with the culture of mathematics for those who do not fit this profile, rather than from inherent differences.

  Wenger's (1998) "ways of belonging" framework explores three processes of identifying with a community, which Anderson (2007) applies to the domain of mathematics education describing three aspects of MI. The first one is engagement in mathematics through tasks, peers, and teachers, shaping students' self-perception and sense of belonging, with recognition boosting confidence and struggles potentially leading to disengagement. The second aspect, imagination, refers to students’ perception of themselves in relation to mathematics beyond the classroom and its relevance to their lives. Finally, alignment involves students adjusting their efforts to meet classroom expectations, with those who value advanced mathematics following necessary pathways, while others may only meet minimum requirements.

This study explores how disadvantaged students construct their MI through the three forms of belonging to the mathematical community and how class and gender shape this process. It aims to identify barriers to identification within the mathematics community and the mechanisms that could support students' positive MI.

The study encompassed six students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Their socioeconomic status was approximated based on their parents' employment status and education level, and the number of books in the household. Students were enrolled in three elementary schools in peripheral areas of Belgrade, from grades 4 and 5. The sample was balanced by gender and grade. All participants had parental consent and verbally agreed to participate and be audio-recorded. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews consisting of four parts. The first part was devoted to gathering basic information and developing rapport. The second part was based on the Mathematical Life Story instrument (Lewis, 2013) designed for mapping critical incidents that shaped students’ relationship with mathematics. The third part focused on different ways of participation in the student’s mathematics classroom. The final part included mapping MI (Ylvisaker, 2008) through discussion of activities, emotions, motivation, and how students believe others perceive them as mathematics learners. The interviews took place in students’ schools and lasted 31 minutes on average. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through several iterations. Using Anderson’s (2007) application of Wenger’s (1999) ways of belonging we identified relevant examples in the participants’ testimonies. Engagement was operationalized as students' general ideas about mathematics; perceived competence; critical experiences that informed self-perception and views on mathematics; teachers', parents', and peers' perceptions and feedback; and the notion of distinguished groups in the classroom regarding mathematics, as well as self-positioning within them. Imagination included responses about the connection between mathematics and students’ interests and values; the perceived usefulness of mathematics; students’ plans for further mathematical education; and their career plans. Literature on behaviors indicative of positive MI (Aguilar et al., 2016; Mićić, 2024) was used to further specify identification through alignment. This process of identification was operationalized as the presence of behaviors and actions associated with success in mathematics (e.g., helping others, participating in mathematics contests, studying mathematics extensively, being passionate about mathematics, attending additional lessons); actual behaviors and actions regarding mathematics education; mathematics learning goals; and the nature of motivation for learning mathematics. The coding scheme was applied using MAXQDA 24 software.

The students' direct engagement with school mathematics led them to construct this subject as confusing and difficult, which contributed to a negative self-image as learners. Their negative views appeared to be linked to the early gap between their competence and the demands of the curriculum, exacerbated by a lack of adequate support. Family help was often mismatched with school methods, reinforcing feelings of incompetence. These experiences led to disengagement, demonstrating the systemic inequities faced by disadvantaged students and the impact on their MI. The analysis highlights a paradox in how disadvantaged students view mathematics. Despite expressing disinterest and disconnection, they recognize its importance in daily life and future careers, feeling pressured to continue studying it. While most students felt mathematics was essential, their lack of confidence and personal connection to the subject created a burden. The students rarely experienced the pathways of successful math learners, such as helping others or participating in contests. Instead, they are focused solely on passing grades, seeking extra help when needed, which further reinforces their negative MI. Gender differences emerged in some aspects of identification, showing that boys' MI construction is somewhat supported by their gender identity. Unlike girls, boys presented their mathematics achievement as malleable and showed an intent to pursue math-related careers. While this indicates that disadvantaged boys have a foundation for building their positive MI, it also places a burden on them to succeed in math due to their gender role. We emphasize the importance of teachers being aware of social class and gender biases and using inclusive teaching practices that create opportunities for all students to feel competent and engaged with mathematics. However, the change must begin with the abandonment of elitist views of mathematics within the mathematics community, that is - among those who tailor teacher education programs and mathematics curricula.

Aguilar, M. S., Rosas, A., Zavaleta, J. G. M., & Romo-Vázquez, A. (2016). Exploring High-achieving Students’ Images of Mathematicians. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(3), 527-548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9586-1 Anderson, R. (2007). Being a mathematics learner: Four faces of identity. Mathematics Educator, 17(1), 7–14. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. Harvard University Press. Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective identities as motivators of action. Educational psychologist, 44(2), 78-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520902832368 Gates, P., & Vistro-Yu, C. P. (2003). Is mathematics for all? In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 31–73). Springer. Gutiérrez, R., & Dixon-Román, E. (2011). Beyond gap gazing: How can thinking about education comprehensively help us (re)envision mathematics education? In B. Atweh, M. Graven, W. Secada, & P. Valero (Eds.), Mapping equity and quality in mathematics education (pp. 21–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2813-4_3. Jovanović, O. (2017). Siromaštvo u kontekstu: Ekološki pristup izučavanju siromaštva [The Poverty of Context: An Ecological Approach to Studying Poverty]. In: Petrović, N. (Ur.), Politička psihologija u savremenom svetu (pp. 177-195). Institut za psihologiju, Filozofski fakultet u Beogradu. Lewis, G. (2013). Emotion and disaffection with school mathematics. Research in Mathematics Education, 15(1), 70–86. 10.1080/14794802.2012.756636. Mićić, K. (2004). Sociokulturološka perspektiva razvoja matematičke kompetencije kod devojčica i dečaka: Matematički identitet učenika kao oslonac i kao prepreka. [Doktorska disertacija, Univerzitet u Beogradu]. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5a3db202-en Radovic, D., Black, L., Williams, J., & Salas, C. E. (2018). Towards conceptual coherence in the research on mathematics learner identity: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 99(1), 21-42. DOI: 10.1007/s10649-018-9819-2. Saw, G., Chang, C. N., & Chan, H. Y. (2018). Cross-sectional and longitudinal disparities in STEM career aspirations at the intersection of gender, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. Educational Researcher, 47(8), 525–531. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X18787818 Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge university press. Ylvisaker, M., Mcpherson, K., Kayes, N., & Pellett, E. (2008). Metaphoric identity mapping: Facilitating goal setting and engagement in rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychological rehabilitation, 18(5-6), 713-741. DOI: 10.1080/09602010802201832.