Skip to main content
Log in

Hierarchical Levels of Abilities that Constitute Fraction Understanding at Elementary School

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines whether the 7 abilities found in a previous study carried out by the authors to constitute fraction understanding of sixth grade elementary school students determine hierarchical levels of fraction understanding. The 7 abilities were as follows: (a) fraction recognition, (b) definitions and mathematical explanations for fractions, (c) argumentations and justifications about fractions, (d) relative magnitude of fractions, (e) representations of fractions, (f) connections of fractions with decimals, percentages, and division, and (g) reflection during the solution of fraction problems. The sample comprised of 182 sixth grade students that were clustered into 3 categories by means of latent class analysis: those of low fraction understanding, those of medium fraction understanding, and those of high fraction understanding. It was found that low fraction understanding students were sufficient in fraction recognition and relative magnitude of fractions, those belonging to the medium category in fraction recognition, relative magnitude of fractions, as well as in connections with decimals, percentages and division and representations of fractions, while high fraction understanding students were sufficient in all 7 abilities. It was also found that these levels were stable across time; the hierarchical levels were the same across three measurements that took place. Possible implications for fraction understanding are discussed, and directions for future research are drawn.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Behr, M. J., Lesh, R., Post, T. R. & Silver, E. A. (1983). Rational number concepts. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 91–126). New York: Academic. New York, NY.

  • Charalambous, C. Y. & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2007). Drawing on a theoretical model to study students’ understandings of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64, 293–316. doi:10.1007/s10649-006-9036-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. M. & Roche, A. (2009). Students’ fraction comparison strategies as a window into robust understanding and possible pointers for instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(1), 127–138. doi:10.1007/s10649-009-9198-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cyprus National Mathematics Curriculum (2010). Mathematics curriculum in Cyprus for grades K-12. Nicosia, Cyprus: Lithostar. Retrieved 10 March, 2013, from http://www.schools.ac.cy/klimakio/Themata/Mathimatika/analytika_programmata/ektenes_programma_mathimatika.pdf.

  • Deliyianni, E. & Gagatsis, A. (2013). Tracing the development of representational flexibility and problem solving in fraction addition: A longitudinal study. Educational Psychology, 33(4), 427–442. doi:10.1080/01443410.2013.765540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103–131. doi:10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagatsis, A., Michaelidou, E. & Shiakalli, M. (2001). Representational theories and the learning of mathematics. Nicosia: ERASMUS IP 1. Nicosia, Cyprus.

  • Kieren, T. E. (1976). On the mathematical, cognitive, and instructional foundations of rational numbers. In R. Lesh (Ed.), Number and Measurement: Papers from a Research Workshop ERIC/SMEAC (pp. 101–144). Columbus, OH.

  • Kieren, T. E. (1993). Rational and fractional numbers: From quotient fields to recursive understanding. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 49–84). NJ: Erlbaum. Hillsdale, NJ.

  • Lamon, S. J. (1999). Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mahwah, NJ.

  • Lamon, S. J. (2012). Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding: Essential content knowledge and instructional strategies for teachers (3rd ed). New York, NY:Routledge.

  • Marcoulides, G. A. & Kyriakides, L. (2010). Structural equation modelling techniques. In B. Creemers, L. Kyriakides & P. Sammons (Eds.), Methodological advances in educational effectiveness research (pp. 277–303). London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

  • Newstead, K. & Murray, H. (1998). Young students’ constructions of fraction. Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education. Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch.

  • Nicolaou, A. & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2011a). Factors that constitute understanding a mathematical concept at the elementary school: Fractions as the concept of reference. Article presented at the 4th Conference of the Union of Greek Researchers in Mathematics Education (pp. 351–361). University of Ioannina, Ioannina.

  • Nicolaou, A. A. & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2011b). A theoretical model for understanding fractions at elementary school. Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the European Society of Mathematics Education (pp. 366–375). Univeristy of Rzeszow, Poland.

  • Niemi, D. (1996a). A fraction is not a piece of pie: Assessing exceptional performance and deep understanding in elementary school mathematics. Gifted Child Quarterly, 40(2), 70–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, D. (1996b). Assessing conceptual understanding in mathematics: Representations, problem solutions, justifications and explanations. Journal of Educational Research, 89(6), 351–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemi, D. (1996c). Instructional influences on content area explanations and representational knowledge: Evidence for the construct validity of measures of principled understanding. CSE Technical Report 403. CRESST/University of California, Los Angeles.

  • Oppenheimer, L. & Hunting, R. P. (1999). Relating fractions & decimals: listening to students talk. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 4(5), 318–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pantziara, M. & Philippou, G. (2012). Levels of students’ “conception” of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 61–83. doi:10.1007/s10649-011-9338-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirie, S. & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 165–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scaptura, C., Suh, J. & Mahaffey, G. (2007). Masterpieces to mathematics: Using art to teach fraction, decimal, and percent equivalents. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13(1), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streefland, L. (1991). Fractions in realistic mathematics education: A paradigm of developmental research. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

  • Stylianides, A. J. (2007). The notion of proof in the context of elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 1–20. doi:10.1007/s10649-006-9038-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vamvakoussi, X. & Vosniadou, S. (2010). How many decimals are there between two fractions? Aspects of secondary school students’ understanding of rational numbers and their notation. Cognition and Instruction, 28(2), 181–209. doi:10.1080/07370001003676603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitin, D. J. & Whitin, P. (2012). Making sense of fractions and percentages. Teaching Children Mathematics, 18(8), 490–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aristoklis A. Nicolaou.

Appendix

Appendix

Items used to measure each ability:

Fraction recognition

Task 3

One of the following fractions differs from the others. Find that fraction and circle it.

$$ \begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}\hfill \frac{2}{7}\hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \frac{3}{2}\hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \frac{14}{49}\hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \frac{10}{35}\hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \hfill & \hfill \frac{4}{14}\hfill \end{array} $$

Definitions and mathematical explanations for fractions

Task 7

How many fractions exist in the interval 0–1. Explain your answer.

(Niemi, 1996c)

Argumentations and justifications about fractions

Task 11

For each of the following statements, circle T if it is true or F if it is false. You must also justify your answer. You should definitely justify your answer.

If I double both the numerator and the denominator of a fraction, then the formed fraction will have double the value of the initial one.

Justification:

……………………………………………………………………………………

(Lamon, 1999)

Reflection during the solution of fraction problems

Task 14

The following diagram represents a machine that outputs \( \frac{2}{3} \) of the input quantity. What is the input quantity if the output quantity is equal to 12? You should definitely reason about your thinking and your answer.

(Charalambous & Pitta-Pantazi, 2007; Lamon, 1999)

Relative magnitude of fractions

Task 17

Order the fractions \( \frac{1}{2} \), \( \frac{4}{3} \), \( \frac{2}{3} \), and \( \frac{1}{4} \) starting from the smallest one.

…………………………………………………………………..

(Clarke & Roche, 2009)

Representations of fractions

Task 27

Marinos ate \( \frac{1}{2} \) of a cake and Marina \( \frac{3}{8} \) of the same cake. Construct a drawing to show what part each child ate and what part the two children ate together.

(Gagatsis et al., 2001)

Connections of fractions with decimals, percentages, and division

Task 30

Decide whether the following statements are correct or incorrect and circle C if they are correct and I if they are incorrect.

  1. 1.

    \( \frac{2}{3} \) is the quotient of the division 2 ÷ 3.

  2. 2.

    \( \frac{12}{7} \) is the quotient of the division 7 ÷ 12.

  3. 3.

    Three pizzas were evenly shared among six children. Each child got \( \frac{3}{6} \) of the pizza.

(Kieren, 1993)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nicolaou, A.A., Pitta-Pantazi, D. Hierarchical Levels of Abilities that Constitute Fraction Understanding at Elementary School. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 14, 757–776 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9603-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9603-4

Keywords

Navigation