Advertisement

Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 871–896 | Cite as

Generating procedural and conceptual knowledge of fractions by pre-service teachers

  • Mohan Chinnappan
  • Tricia Forrester
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

Knowledge that teachers bring to the teaching context is of interest to key stakeholders in improving levels of numeracy attained by learners. In this regard, the centrality of, and the need to investigate, the quality of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching mathematics has been gaining momentum in recent years. There is a general consensus that teachers need a robust body of content and pedagogical knowledge related to mathematics and that one impacts on the other. However, in current debates about this interconnection between content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge, there is limited analysis about the procedural-conceptual nature of content knowledge that, we argue, has significant impact on the development of pedagogical content knowledge. In this report, this issue is investigated by examining the state of procedural and conceptual knowledge of two cohorts of pre-service teachers and analyzing the impact of a representational reasoning teaching and learning (RRTL) approach aimed at supporting a balanced development of these two dimensions of Content Knowledge.

Keywords

Pre-service teacher knowledge Fractions Procedural knowledge Conceptual knowledge Mathematical knowledge for teaching 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Portions of the work reported here were presented at the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia conference, Alice Springs.

References

  1. Ball, D. L. (1990). The mathematical understanding that preservice teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90, 449–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L., Hill, H. C., & Bass, H. (2005). Knowing mathematics for teaching: who knows mathematics well enough to teach third grade, and how can we decide? American Educator, 5(3), 14–17. 20–22, 43–46.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: what makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barmby, P., Harries, T., Higgins, S., & Suggate, J. (2009). The array representation and primary children’s understanding and reasoning in multiplication. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baroody, A. J., Feil, Y., & Johnson, A. R. (2005). An alternative reconceputalization of procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 115–131.Google Scholar
  6. Board of Studies NSW. (2002). Mathematics K-6: syllabus 2002. Sydney: Author.Google Scholar
  7. Board of Studies NSW. (2003). Mathematics years 7–10 syllabus. Sydney: Author.Google Scholar
  8. Bobis, J., Higgins, J., Cavanagh, M., & Roche, A. (2012). Professional knowledge of practicing teachers of mathematics. In B. Perry, T. Lowrie, T. Logan, A. MacDonald, & J. Greenlees (Eds.), Mathematics education research group of Australasia: research in mathematics education in Australasia 2008–2011 (pp. 313–341). The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Booker, G., Bond, D., Sparrow, L., & Swan, P. (2010). Teaching primary mathematics (4th ed.). Pearson: French’s Forest.Google Scholar
  10. Chick, H. (2010). Aspects of teachers’ knowledge for helping students learn about ratio. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (Vol. 1, pp. 145–152). Fremantle: MERGA.Google Scholar
  11. Chinnappan, M., & Chandler, P. (2010). Managing cognitive load in the mathematics classroom. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 66(1), 5–11.Google Scholar
  12. Council of the Australian Government. (2008). National numeracy review report. Canberra: Author.Google Scholar
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage publications.Google Scholar
  14. Flores, A. (2002). Profound understanding of division of fractions. In B. Litwiller & G. Bright (Eds.), NCTM handbook: Making sense of fractions, ratios and proportions (pp. 237–246). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  15. Frid, S., Goos, M., & Sparrow, L. (2009). What knowledge is needed for effective teaching of mathematics? Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 9, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Groth, R. E., & Bergner, J. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptual and procedural knowledge of mean, median, and mode. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(1), 37–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hallett, D., Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2010). Individual differences in conceptual and procedural knowledge when learning fractions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harvey, R. (2012). Stretching student teachers’ understanding of fractions. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24, 493–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hill, H. C., Ball, D., & Schilling, S. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372–400.Google Scholar
  20. Lamon, S. J. (2007). Rational numbers and proportional reasoning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 629–667). Charlotte: Information Age.Google Scholar
  21. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lesh, R., & Zawojewski, J. (2007). Problem solving and modeling. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 763–807). Charlotte: Information Age.Google Scholar
  23. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Mack, N. K. (2001). Building on informal knowledge through instruction in a complex content domain: partitioning, units, and understanding multiplication of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(3), 267–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mason, J., Stephens, M., & Watson, A. (2009). Appreciating mathematical structure for all. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21(2), 10–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Newton, K. J. (2008). An extensive analysis of pre-service elementary teachers’ knowledge of fractions. American Education Research Journal. doi: 10.3102/0002831208320851.Google Scholar
  27. NSW Department of Education and Training. (2003). Fractions, pikelets and lamingtons. Ryde: Author.Google Scholar
  28. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: an iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 346–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schneider, M., & Stern, E. (2010). The developmental relations between conceptual and procedural knowledge: a multimethod approach. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 178–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Senk, S., Tatto, M. T., Reckase, M., Rowley, G., Peck, R., & Bankov, K. (2012). Knowledge of future primary teachers for teaching mathematics: an international comparative study. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 4(15), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Siebert, D. (2002). Connecting informal thinking and algorithms: the case of division of fractions. In B. Litwiller & G. Bright (Eds.), NCTM yearbook: Making sense of fractions, ratios and proportions (pp. 247–256). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  34. Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20–26.Google Scholar
  35. Tirosh, D. (2000). Enhancing prospective teachers’ knowledge of children’s conceptions: the case of division of fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics, 31(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Walshaw, M. (2012). Teacher knowledge as fundamental to effective teaching practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15(3), 181–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.University of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options