These five papers, originating from a range of participant countries in the international Learner’s Perspective Study (LPS) of grade 8 mathematics classrooms, draw on student voice data to inform and challenge our perspective of effective teaching and learning of mathematics. Data were generated from video lesson sequences and a series of post-lesson teacher and student interviews. Representing a range of diverse education systems, these papers contribute to our understanding of the nature and role of social learning and knowledge generation opportunities within mathematics classrooms. Three of the papers look directly at the ways mathematical talk is prioritized within the classroom and the implication this has for student participatory practices and learning outcomes. Clarke’s analysis of data from a range of countries provides evidence that while student-student mathematical talk was a prioritised instructional tool in some classrooms it was almost entirely absent in others. Students’ use of mathematical terms within post-lesson interviews, in which students provided description of the lesson and their learning, are compared with the use of mathematical terminology within lessons. Kaur and Ghani’s paper also explore students’ opportunities for public talk—this time in one classroom in Singapore. Their analysis of the nature of the talk indicated that students’ oral contributions were more likely procedural or calculational in form. The paper considers how this finding is related to the social and mathematical obligations for classroom discourse. Ohtani, also looks closely at the classroom discourse in one classroom. Based on an analysis of both the private and public interactions the paper explores whose voices are privileged within the interactions and discusses implications in terms of expectations for participatory practices and knowledge construction. The other two papers focus on the voice of the student post lesson. In their analysis, both Anthony and Mok link student reflections on their classroom learning experiences, with a focus on those experiences that are facilitated by the teacher, to the mathematical and social obligations experienced and observed within the classroom lesson sequences. What is evident across the papers is that the opportunities for mathematical talk and the nature of that mathematical talk varied considerably both within and across countries. Collectively, the papers provide a strong case that the nature of the mathematical discourse in the classroom is socially mediated. Moreover, student participation in discourse appears to be implicated in both the social and mathematical obligations of the classrooms. The nature and press for discourse provides a window to what is valued in terms of potential learning outcomes. While all of the teachers involved in the LPS study were considered to be teachers of quality, and indeed the student voice presented in two of the papers directly affirm this view, the papers collectively hint that the varied opportunities to participate in productive mathematical discourse are mediated by the teacher. An exploration of student voice—be it within or out of classrooms—continues to provide a valuable perspective concerning the participatory practices and learning outcomes within mathematics classrooms.