Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The cognitive demands of understanding the sample space

  • Original Article
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to our analysis of cognitive demands, the concepts of classification, logical multiplication and ratio provide a basis for understanding sample space. These basic concepts develop during the elementary school years, which suggest that it is possible to teach elementary school children effectively about sample space. This hypothesis was tested in an intervention study, in which Grade 6 children (aged 10–11 years) were randomly assigned to one of three groups: a sample space group (SSG), a problem-solving group, and an unseen comparison group. The SSG showed significantly more progress than both comparison groups in three post-tests, including one given 2 months after the teaching had ended. We conclude that our analysis of the cognitive demands of sample space was supported and discuss the implications for mathematics education.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adey, P., Csapó, B., Demetriou, A., Hautamaki, J., & Shayer, M. (2007). Can we be intelligent about intelligence? Why education needs the concept of plastic general ability. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 75–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batanero, C., & Sanchez, E. (2005). What is the nature of high school students’ conceptions and misconceptions about probability? In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 241–266). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. (1981). Number operations. In K. Hart (Ed.), Children’s Understanding of Mathematics: 11–16 (pp. 23–47). Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, P. & Nunes, T. (2012). Children’s understanding of probability. A literature review. http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Nuffield_CuP_FULL_REPORTv_FINAL.pdf. Accessed 8 April 2014.

  • Bryant, P., Nunes, T. Evans, D., Gottardis, L. & Terlektsi, M. E. (2011) Teaching primary school children about randomness. http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/results-of-the-intervention-about-probability-5.pdf. Accessed 8 April 2014.

  • Confrey, J. (1994). Splitting, similarity and rate of change: a new approach to multiplication and exponential functions. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 293–332). Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coter, J. E., & Zahner, D. C. (2007). Use of external visual representations in probability problem solving. Statistics Education Research Journal, 6, 22–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, L. G. (1970). The growth of systematic thinking: Replication and analysis of Piaget’s first chemical experiment. Australian Journal of Psychology, Health and Medicine, 22, 277–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desli, D. (1999). Children’s understanding of intensive quantities. University of London, Unpublished Ph D Thesis.

  • Eizenberg, M. M., & Zaslavsky, O. (2003). Cooperative problem solving in combinatorics: The inter-relations between control processes and successful solutions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 389–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eizenberg, M. M., & Zaslavsky, O. (2004). Students’ verification strategies for combinatorial problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbein, E. (1975). The intuitive sources of probabilistic thinking in children. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Co.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbein, E., & Grossman, A. (1997). Schemata and intuitions in combinatorial reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischbein, E., Pampu, I., & Minzat, I. (1970). Effects of age and instruction on combinatorial ability of children. Part 3. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 261–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garfield, J., & Ahlgren, A. (1988). Difficulties in learning basic concepts in probability and statistics: implications for research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19, 44–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Reckoning with risk. Learning to live with uncertainty. London: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C., Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2010). Intensive quantities: Why they matter to developmental research. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 28, 307–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C., Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2011). Rational number and proportional reasoning: Using intensive quantities to promote achievement in mathematics and science. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 391–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic books.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1964). The early growth of logic in the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keren, G. (1984). On the importance of identifying the ‘correct’ problem space. Cognition, 16, 121–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kloo, D., & Perner, J. (2003). Training transfer between card sorting and false belief understanding: Helping children apply conflicting descriptions. Child Development, 74, 1823–1839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolloffel, B., Eysink, T. H. S., & de Jong, T. (2010). The influence of learner-generated domain representations on learning combinatorics and probability theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeCoutre, M.-P. (1992). Cognitive models and problem spaces in “purely random” situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(6), 557–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LeCoutre, M.-P., & Durand, R.-L. (1988). Jugements probabilistes et modèles cognitifs; etudes d’une situation aléatoire. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19, 357–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, J. T., & Mitchelmore, M. C. (1997). Young children’s intuitive models of multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 309–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, S. F., & Lee, K. (2009). The model method: Singapore children’s tool for representing and solving algebraic word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 282–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T. (2013). Are pupils’ understandings of certainty and of probabilities different dimensions of mathematical ability? Unpublished report presented to the John Fell Foundation, University of Oxford.

  • Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2008). Rational numbers and intensive quantities: Challenges and insights to pupils’ implicit knowledge. Anales de Psicología, 24, 262–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Evans, D. & Bell, D. (2010). The scheme of correspondence and its role in children’s mathematics. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Monograph Series II, Number 7, Understanding number development and difficulties, pp. 83–99.

  • Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Pretzlik, U., & Hurry, J. (2006). Fractions: Difficult but crucial in mathematics learning. London: ESRC-Teaching and Learning Research Programme, London Institute of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T., Desli, D., & Bell, D. (2003). The development of children’s understanding of intensive quantities. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 652–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1975). The origin of the idea of chance in children. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven, J. C. (1941). Standardisation of progressive matrices, 1938. British Journal of Medical Psychology, XIX(1), 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, J. (1988). Intensive quantity and referent transforming arithmetic operations. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 41–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffe, L. (1994). Children’s multiplying schemes. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 3–40). Albany (NY): State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streefland, L. (1985). Search for the roots of ratio: some thoughts on the long term learning process (towards…a theory): part II: the outline of the long term learning process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16, 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T. Bryant, P., Gottardis, L., Terlektsi, M. E., & Evans, D. (2011) Teaching problem solving in primary school. http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/results-of-the-intervention-on-problem-solving.pdf. Accessed 8 April 2014.

  • Teixeira, L. R. M., de Campos, E. G. J., Vasconcellos, M., & Guimarães, S. D. (2011). Problemas multiplicativos envolvendo combinatória: estratégias de resolução empregadas por alunos do Ensino Fundamental público (Multiplicative problems including combinatorics: solving strategies adopted by Public Elementary School students). Educar em Revista, 1, 245–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. (1994). The development of the concept of speed and its relationship to concept of rate. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 181–236). Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Walle, J. A. (1994). Elementary school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (1982). A classification of cognitive tasks and operations of thought involved in addition and subtraction problems. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 60–67). Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (1983). Multiplicative structures. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 128–175). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (2009). The theory of conceptual fields. Human Development, 52, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass: M.I.T. Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Terezinha Nunes, Peter Bryant, Deborah Evans, Laura Gottardis & Maria-Emmanouela Terlektsi

Authors
  1. Terezinha Nunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Bryant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Deborah Evans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Laura Gottardis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Maria-Emmanouela Terlektsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terezinha Nunes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Evans, D. et al. The cognitive demands of understanding the sample space. ZDM Mathematics Education 46, 437–448 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0581-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0581-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation