# Knowledge building in mathematics: Supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems

- First Online:

- 23 Citations
- 657 Downloads

## Abstract

While it has been suggested that patterning activities support early algebra learning, it is widely acknowledged that the shift from perceiving patterns to understanding algebraic functions—and correspondingly, from reporting empirical patterns to providing explanations—is difficult. This paper reports on the collaborations of grade 4 students (*n* = 68) from three classrooms in diverse urban settings, connected through a knowledge-building environment (Knowledge Forum), when solving mathematical generalizing problems as part of an early algebra research project. The purpose of this study was to investigate the underlying principles of idea improvement and epistemic agency and the potential of knowledge building—as supported by Knowledge Forum—to support student work. Our analyses of student-generated collaborative workspaces revealed that students were able to find multiple rules for challenging problems and revise their own conjectures regarding those rules. Furthermore, the discourse was sustained over 8 weeks and students were able to find similarities across problem types without the support of teachers or researchers, suggesting that these grade-4 students had developed a disposition for evidence use and justification that eludes much older students.

### Keywords

Early algebra Collaborative mathematical discourse Patterns and generalizing problems Knowledge building Knowledge forum Epistemic agency## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

### References

- Beatty, R., & Moss, J. (2006).
*Grade 4 generalizing through online collaborative problem solving*. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar - Bednarz, N., Kieran, C., & Lee, L. (1996). Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.),
*Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching*(pp. 3–12). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Bereiter, C. (2002).
*Education and mind in the knowledge age*. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In L. Resnick (Ed.),
*Knowing, learning, and instruction*(pp. 361–392). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. De Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. van Merriënboer (Eds.),
*Powerful learning environments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions*. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar - Blanton, M., & Kaput, J. (2004). Elementary grades students’ capacity for functional thinking. In M. Jonsen Hoines & A. Fuglestad (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 2*, 135–142.Google Scholar - Carraher, D., & Earnest, D. (2003). Guess my rule revisited. In N. Pateman, B. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the twenty-seventh international conference for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 2*(pp. 173–180). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar - Carraher, D., Schlieman, A., Brzuella, B., & Enrnest, D. (2006). Arithmetic and algebra in early mathematics education.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37*(2), 87–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Case, R., & Okamoto, Y. (1996). The role of central conceptual structures in the development of children’s thought.
*Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 61*, (1–2, Serial No. 246). Chicago: Universlity of Chicago Press.Google Scholar - Cooper, M., & Sakane, H. (1986). Comparative experimental study of children’s strategies with deriving a mathematical law. In
*Proceedings of the tenth international conference for the psychology of mathematics education*(pp. 410–414). London: University of London, Institute of Education.Google Scholar - Cuevas, G. J., & Yeatts, K. (2001).
*Navigating through algebra in grades 3–5*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - English, L. D., & Warren, E. (1998). Introducing the variable through pattern exploration.
*The Mathematics Teacher, 91*(2), 166–171.Google Scholar - Ferrini-Mundy, J., Lappan, G., & Phillips, E. (1997).
*Experiences with patterning*.*Teaching children mathematics, algebraic thinking focus issue*(pp. 282–288). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Greenes, C., Cavanagh, M., Dacey, L., Findell, C., & Small, M. (2001).
*Navigating through algebra in prekindergarten—Grade 2*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1999). Visual and symbolic reasoning in mathematics: Making connections with computers.
*Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1*, 59–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Hoyles, C. (1998).
*Lessons we have learnt: Effective technologies for effective mathematics*. Paper prepared for the conference on Technology in the Standards, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar - Hurme, T., & Jarvela, S. (2005). Students’ activity in computer-supported collaborative problem solving in mathematics.
*International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 10*, 49–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Jacobs, K., Hiebert, J., Bogard Givvin, K., Hollingsworth, H., Garnier, H., & Wearne, D. (2006). Does eighth-grade mathematics teaching in the United States align with the NCTM Standards? Results from the TIMSS 1995 and 1999 video studies.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37*(1), 5–32.Google Scholar - Kaput, J. (1998). Transforming algebra from an engine of inequity to an engine of mathematical power by “algebrafying” the K-12 curriculum. In S. Fennel (Ed.),
*The nature and role of algebra in the K-14 curriculum: Proceedings of a national symposium*(pp. 25–26). Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.Google Scholar - Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),
*The handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning*(pp. 390–419). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar - Lee, L. (1996). An initiation into algebraic culture through generalization activities. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.),
*Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching*(pp. 65–86). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Lee, L., & Wheeler, D. (1987)
*Algebraic thinking in high school students: Their conceptions of generalisation and justification*(Research report). Montreal, Canada: Concordia University.Google Scholar - London McNab, S., & Moss, J. (2006).
*Making connections: fostering fluency across geometric and numeric patterns*. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar - Mason, J. (1996). Expressing generality and roots of algebra. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.),
*Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching*(pp. 65–86). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Moses, B. (1997).
*Algebra for a new century. Teaching children mathematics, algebraic thinking focus issue*(pp. 264–265). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Moss. (2005).
*Integrating numeric and geometric patterns: A developmental approach to young students’ learning of patterns and functions*. Paper presented at the Canadian mathematics education study group 29 Annual Meeting, Ottowa, Canada.Google Scholar - Moss, J., & Beatty, R. (2005).
*Grade 4 children work together to build their understanding of mathematical functions*. Paper presented at the Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar - Moss, J., & Case, R. (1999). Developing Children’s Understanding of Rational Numbers: A New Model and Experimental Curriculum.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30*(2), 122–147, 119.Google Scholar - Moss, J., Beatty, R., Barkin, S., & Shillolo, G. (to publish in 2008). What is your theory? What is your rule? Fourth graders build their understanding of patterns. In C. Greenes (Ed.),
*NCTM yearbook for algebraic reasoning*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Moss, J., Beatty, R., & London McNab, S. (2006).
*Design for the development and teaching of an integrated patterning curriculum*. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar - Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Hakkarainen, L. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: How do they shape progressive inquiry discourse?
*Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14*(4), 527–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Nason, R., & Woodruff, E. (2002). New ways of learning mathematics: Are we ready for it? In
*Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE)*(pp. 1536–1537). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000).
*Principles and standardsfor school mathematics*. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Noss, R., Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1997). The construction of mathematical meanings: Connecting the visual with the symbolic.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33*(2), 203–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996).
*Windows on mathematical meanings: Learning cultures and computers*. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Ontario Ministry of Education and Training (OMET) (2003)
*Early math strategy: The report of the expert panel on early math in Ontario*. Ontario, CA: Queen’s Printer.Google Scholar - Ontario Ministry of Education and Training (OMET) (2005).
*The Ontario curriculum, grades 1–8: Mathematics, revised*. Ontario, CA: Queen’s Printer.Google Scholar - Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Murayama, I., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., Yamamoto, T., et al. (2006). Knowledge-building activity structures in Japanese elementary science pedagogy.
*International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 1*(2), 229–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Radford, L. (1999). The rhetoric of generalization. In O. Zaslavsky (Ed.),
*Proceedings of the 23rd conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 4*(pp. 89–96). Haifa: Technion-Israel Institute of Technology.Google Scholar - Radford, L. (2000). Signs and meanings in students’ emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic analysis.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42*(3), 237–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Rubenstein, R. (2002). Building explicit and recursive forms of patterns with the function game.
*Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 7*(8), 426–431.Google Scholar - Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.),
*Liberal education in a knowledge society*(pp. 67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar - Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge forum®. In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.),
*Education and technology: An encyclopedia*(pp. 183–192). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, Inc.Google Scholar - Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1996). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.),
*Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice*(pp. 201–228). Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar - Seo, K. H., & Ginsburg, H. P. (2004). What is developmentally appropriate in early childhood mathematics education? Lessons from new research. In D. H. Clements & J. Sarama (Eds.),
*Engaging young children in mathematics: Standards for early childhood mathematics education*(pp. 91–104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Sfard, A. (1995). The development of algebra: Confronting historical and psychological perspectives.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12*, 353–383.Google Scholar - Stacey, K. (1989). Finding and using patterns in linear generalising problems.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20*, 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Steele, D. (2005). Using writing to access students’ schemata knowledge for algebraic thinking.
*School Science and Mathematics, 105*(3), 142–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Steele, D., & Johanning, D. (2004). A schematic–theoretic view of problem solving and development of algebraic thinking.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57*(1), 65–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Swafford, J., & Langrall, C. (2000). Grade 6 students’ preinstructional use of equations to describe and represent problem situations.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31*(1), 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Warren, E. (1996).
*Interaction between instructional approaches, students’ reasoning processes, and their understanding of elementary algebra*. Unpublished dissertation, University of Technology, Queensland, Australia.Google Scholar - Warren, E. (2000). Visualisation and the development of early understanding in algebra. In M. V. D. Heuvel-Penhuizen (Ed.),
*Proceedings of the 24th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 4*(pp. 273–280). Hiroshima, Japan.Google Scholar - Willoughby, S. (1997). Functions from kindergarten through sixth grade.
*Teaching Children Mathematics, 3*, 314–318, February.Google Scholar - Zazkis, R., & Liljedahl, P. (2002). Generalization of patterns: The tension between algebraic thinking and algebraic notation.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49*, 379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar