Advertisement

Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 547–567 | Cite as

Learning about the numerator and denominator in teacher-designed lessons

  • Angelika Kullberg
  • Ulla Runesson
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

This study concerns pupils’ experience of unit and non-unit fractions of a discrete quantity during specially designed lessons. The aim was to explore pupils’ understanding of operations such as b/c of a in lessons where the teachers were aware of some pupils’ difficulties beforehand and what needed special attention. Five classes were involved in the study and 10 video-recorded lessons and written pre- and post-tests were analysed. Even though the lessons were designed for learning how to operate with both unit and non-unit fractions, we found that more pupils could solve items with unit fractions than with non-unit fractions. We found that few pupils in this study had difficulties with equal partitioning. Instead, it seemed difficult for some pupils to understand the role of the numerator and denominator and to differentiate between the amount of parts and the amount of objects in each part, and some pupils did not differentiate between the numbers of units and the amount of objects within a unit. This study identified some critical aspects that the pupils need to discern in order to learn how to operate with unit and non-unit fractions of a discrete quantity.

Keywords

Fractions Mathematics Learning Teaching Variation theory 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this article was supported financially by a grant from the Swedish National Research Council. We would like to thank Joanne Lobato, Cecilia Kilhamn and Marj Horne for their thoughtful comments on drafts of this paper. We especially thank the anonymous reviewers whose feedback contributed to a stronger article.

References

  1. Ball, D. L. (1993). Halves, pieces, and twoths: constructing and using represential contexts in teaching fractions. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integrating of research (pp. 157–195). Hillsdale,: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1992). Rational number, ratio, and proportion. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 296–333). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1993). Rational numbers: towards a symantic analysis - emphasis on the operator construct. In T. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 13–47). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Brizuela, B. (2005). Young children’s notations for fractions. Educational studies in Mathematics, 62(1), 281–305.Google Scholar
  5. Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. United States: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Empson, S. B. (1999). Equal sharing and shared meaning: the development of fraction concepts in a first-grade classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 17(3), 283–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Empson, S. B. (2011). On the idea of learning trajectories: promises and pitfalls. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 8(3), 571–598.Google Scholar
  8. Empson, S. B., & Levi, L. (2011). Extending children’s mathematics: Fractions and decimals. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  9. Gibson, J. J., & Gibson, E. J. (1955). Perceptual learning: differentiation –or enrichment? Psychological Review, 62(1), 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hackenberg, A. J. (2007). Units coordination and the instruction of improper fractions: a revision of the splitting hypothesis. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 27–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Häggström, J. (2008). Teaching systems of linear equations in Sweden and China: What is made possible to learn? (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 262). Göteborg Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
  12. Kerslake, D. (1986). Fractions. A report of the strategies and errors in secondary mathematics project. Windsor: Nfer-Nelson.Google Scholar
  13. 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. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. Kullberg, A. (2010). What is taught and what is learned. Professional insights gained and shared by teachers of mathematics (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 293). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
  15. Kullberg, A., Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2009). Variation within, and covariation between, representations. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & C. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 433–440). Thessaloniki: PME.Google Scholar
  16. Lamon, S. J. (1996). The development of unitizing: its role in children’s partitioning strategies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 170–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 323). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
  19. Mack, N. K. (1993). Learning rational numbers with understanding: The case of informal knowledge. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Marton, F., & Neuman, D. (1996). Phenomenography and children’s experience of division. In P. L. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  23. Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Mason, J. (2004). Researching your own practice. The discipline of noticing. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  27. Mason, J. (2010). Noticing. Roots and branches. In M. Gamoran Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teachers noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes. New york: Routlege.Google Scholar
  28. Morris, A. K., & Hiebert, J. (2011). Creating shared instructional products: an alternative approach to improving teaching. Educational Researcher, 40(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Olive, J. (2011). Fractions on a dynamic number line. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 289–296). Ankara: PME.Google Scholar
  30. Olive, J., & Vomvoridi, E. (2006). Making sense of instruction on fractions when students lacks necessary fractional schemes: the case of Tim. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25(1), 18–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pang, M. F. (2010). Boosting financial literacy: benefits from learning study. Instructional Science, 38(6), 659–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Petit, M. M., Laird, R. E., & Marsden, E. L. (2010). A focus on fractions. Bringing research to the classroom. New York: Routhledge.Google Scholar
  33. Pitkethly, A., & Hunting, R. (1996). A review of recent research in the area of initial fraction concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30(1), 5–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Runesson, U. (1999). Variationens pedagogik. Skilda sätt att behandla ett matematiskt innehåll [The pedagogy of variation. Different ways of handling the same topic; in Swedish]. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
  35. Runesson, U., & Mok, I. (2005). The teaching of fractions: a comperative study of a Swedish and a Hong Kong classroom. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 1–15.Google Scholar
  36. Steffe, L. P. (2004). On construction of learning trajectories of children: the case of commensurate fractions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 129–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Steffe, L. P., & Olive, J. (2010). Children’s fractional knowledge. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thompson, P. W., & Saldanha, L. A. (2003). Fractions and multiplicative reasoning. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to the principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 95–114). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  39. Tzur, R. (2004). Teacher and students’ joint production of a reversible fraction conception. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23(1), 93–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Watanabe, T. (1995). Coordination of units and understanding of simple fractions: case studies. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 160–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilkins, J. L. M., & Norton, A. (2011). The splitting loope. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(4), 386–416.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional StudiesUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden
  2. 2.School of Education and CommunicationUniversity of Jonkoping, HLKJönköpingSweden
  3. 3.Wits School of EducationUniversity of the WitwatersrandJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options