Teaching children how to include the inversion principle in their reasoning about quantitative relations
- 656 Downloads
The basis of this intervention study is a distinction between numerical calculus and relational calculus. The former refers to numerical calculations and the latter to the analysis of the quantitative relations in mathematical problems. The inverse relation between addition and subtraction is relevant to both kinds of calculus, but so far research on improving children’s understanding and use of the principle of inversion through interventions has only been applied to the solving of a + b − b = ? sums. The main aim of the intervention described in this article was to study the effects of teaching children about the explicit use of inversion as part of the relational calculus needed to solve inverse addition and subtraction problems using a calculator. The study showed that children taught about relational calculus differed significantly from those who were taught numerical procedures, and also that effects of the intervention were stronger when children were taught about relational calculus with mixtures of indirect and direct word problems than when these two types of problem were given to them in separate blocks.
KeywordsInverse relation between addition and subtraction Relational calculus Numerical calculus Teaching the inverse relation
The authors are grateful to the Economic and Social Research Centre, Teaching and Learning Research Programme for grant #L139251015 which made this research possible. We are very thankful to the schools, teachers, and children without whose generous participation, no research would be possible.
- Beishuizen, M. (1997). Development of mathematical strategies and procedures up to 100. In M. Beishuizen, K. P. E. Gravemeijer, & E. C. D. M. van Lieshout (Eds.), The role of contexts and models in the development of mathematical strategies and procedures (pp. 127–162). Utrecht: Beta.Google Scholar
- Brissiaud, R. (1994). Teaching and development: Solving “missing addend” problems using subtraction. In B. Schneuwly & M. Brossard (Eds.): Learning and development: contributions from Vygotsky. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 9, 343–365.Google Scholar
- Bryant, P., & Nunes, T. (2009) Key understandings in mathematics learning. Paper 2. Understanding whole numbers. Available from: http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/fileLibrary/pdf/P2.pdf
- Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1982). The development of addition and subtraction problem solving. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 10–24). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Hart, K., Brown, M., Kerslake, D., Kuchermann, D., & Ruddock, G. (1985). Chelsea diagnostic mathematics tests. Fractions 1. Windsor: NFER-Nelson.Google Scholar
- Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (1996). Children doing mathematics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Sylva, K., & Barros, R. (2009). Development of maths capabilities and confidence in primary school (No. Research Report DCSF-RR118). London: Department for Children, Schools and Families. Available from: http://publications.dcsf.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-RB118.pdf
- Nunes, T., Schliemann, A. D., & Carraher, D. W. (1993). Street mathematics and school mathematics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Piaget, J. (1950). The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Riley, M., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children’s problem solving ability in arithmetic. In H. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). New York: Academic.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: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar