In an innovative, progressive school, students were asked to solve a fairly routine mathematical problem using real money in a "real-world" scenario. Even though the school values students' ideas, the reaction of the teacher to one student's alternative modelling of the problem suggests that he was expecting a particular answer to be provided using routine mathematical models and thinking while not being interested in exploring the student's unexpected alternative. We place his reasoning for doing so within broad pedagogical discourses that we think define the "allowable" responses of teachers and students in ways that inhibit meaning-making for both. These broad discourses are defined as the progressive constructivist approach, the scaffolding discursive approach, the situation modelling approach and the dialogic approach. We consider the advantages and the potential consequences each might bring to the case. We suggest that extensive consideration of pedagogical discourses in mathematics classes must be reconsidered both for how we understand students' mathematical meaning-making and how we construct student agency in relationship to culture, whether as apprentices or authors.