Advertisement

Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 563–584 | Cite as

Ben’s perception of space and subitizing activity: a constructivist teaching experiment

  • Beth L. MacDonald
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

This 22-session constructivist teaching experiment set out to investigate a preschool student’s number understanding relative to his subitizing activity. Subitizing, a quick apprehension of the numerosity of a small set of items, has been found to characterize perceptual and conceptual processes students rely on as their understanding of number develops. The purpose for this study is to investigate how a preschool student’s, Ben, perceptual subitizing activity changed relative to the density of items and the development of his number understanding. Findings indicated that early on in the teaching experiment, Ben’s perceptual subitizing activity was influenced by his primary reliance upon the perceived amount of space between items. Shifts in reasoning when perceptually subitizing indicated physiological and experiential development in Ben’s number understanding, as Ben described the number of items increasing when the perceived amount of space between items decreased. Number conservation was considered as relevant to these findings because Ben’s explanation for why a number could increase or decrease mirrored similar logic when unable to conserve number. Implications of this study suggest nuances in number understanding development which can explain preschool students’ reliance upon a more refined set of perceptual subitizing.

Keywords

Subitizing Conservation of number Number understanding 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arp, S., & Fagard, J. (2005). What impairs subitizing in Cerebal Palsied children?. Wiley Periodicals, Inc., 47, 89–102. doi:  10.1002/dev.-20069
  2. Baroody, A. J., Lai, M. L., Li, X., & Baroody, A. E. (2009). Preschoolers' understanding of subtraction-related principles. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(1–2), 41–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borst, G., Simon, G., Vidal, J., & Houdé, O. (2013). Inhibitory control and visuo-spatial reversibility in Piaget's seminal number conservation task: a high-density ERP study. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 7, 1–12. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Canobi, K. H., & Bethune, N. E. (2008). Number words in young children’s conceptual and procedural knowledge of addition, subtraction and inversion. Cognition, 108(3), 675–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2007). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: summative research on the Building Blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 136–163.Google Scholar
  6. Clements, D. H., & Sarama J. (2014). Play, mathematics, and false dichotomies. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://preschoolmatters.org/2014/03/03/playmathematics-and-false-dichotomies/
  7. Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ginsburg, H. P., Lee, J. S., & Boyd, J. S. (2008). Mathematics Education for Young Children: What It Is and How to Promote It. Social Policy Report. Volume 22, Number 1. Society for Research in Child Development.Google Scholar
  9. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: a way of knowing and learning. NY: Taylor & Francis group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaufman, E. L., Lord, M. W., Reese, T. W., & Volkmann, J. (1949). The discrimination of number. The American Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 498–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. LaPointe, K., & O'Donnell, J. P. (1974). Number conservation in children below age six: its relationship to age, perceptual dimensions, and language comprehension. Developmental Psychology, 10(3), 422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (2003). Subitizing and similarity: toward a pattern-matching theory of enumeration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(3), 676–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MacDonald, B. L., & Wilkins, J. L. M. (2015a). Amy’s subitizing activity relative to number understanding: a constructivist teaching experiment. Manuscript forthcoming.Google Scholar
  14. MacDonald, B. L. & Wilkins, J. L. M. (2015b). Seven types of subitizing activity characterizing young children’s mental activity. In S. Marx & S. L. Gregory (Eds.), Qualitative research in STEM.Google Scholar
  15. Malach, R., Reppas, J. B., Benson, R. R., Kwong, K. K., Jiang, H., Kennedy, W. A., Tootell, R. B. (1995). Object-related activity revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging in human occipital cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92(18), 8135–8139.Google Scholar
  16. Mandler, G., & Shebo, B. J. (1982). Subitizing: an analysis of its component processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 3(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mehler, J., & Bever, T. G. (1967). Cognitive capacity of very young children. Science, 158(3797), 141–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moradmand, N., Datta, A., & Oakley, G. (2013). A computer-assisted framework based on a cognitivist learning theory for teaching mathematics in the early primary years. Australian Educational Computing, 27(2), 39–45.Google Scholar
  19. Piaget, J. (1965). The child’s conception of number. (C. Gattegno and F. M. Hodgson, Trans.). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. (Original work published in 1941).Google Scholar
  20. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. (E. Duckworth, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. (Original work published in 1968).Google Scholar
  21. Pylyshyn, Z. (1989). The role of location indexes in spatial perception: a sketch of the FINST spatial-index model. Cognition, 32(1), 65–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ramani, G. B., & Siegler, R. S. (2011). Reducing the gap in numerical knowledge between low and middle-income preschoolers. Journal of applied developmental Psychology, 32(3), 146–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rothenberg, B. B., & Courtney, R. G. (1968). Conservation of number in very young children: a replication of and comparison with Mehler and Bever's study. The Journal of Psychology, 70(2), 205–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H. (2009). Early childhood mathematics education research: learning trajectories for young children. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Sasanguie, D., De Smedt, B., Defever, E., & Reynvoet, B. (2012). Association between basic numerical abilities and mathematics achievement. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 344–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Starkey, G. S., & McCandliss, B. D. (2014). The emergence of “groupitizing” in children’s numerical cognition. Journal of experimental child psychology, 126, 120–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Steffe, L. P. (1991). The constructivist teaching experiment: illustrations and implications. In E. von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Radical constructivism in mathematics education (pp. 171–194). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Steffe, L. P., & Ulrich, C. (2014). The constructivist teaching experiment. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8.Google Scholar
  29. Ulrich, C., Tillema, E. S., Hackenberg, A. J., & Norton, A. (2014). Constructivist model building: empirical examples from mathematics education. Constructivist Foundations, 9(3), 328–339.Google Scholar
  30. Willoughby, R. H., & Trachy, S. (1971). Conservation of number in very young children: a failure to replicate Mehler and Bever. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development, 205–209.Google Scholar
  31. Zahn, C. T. (1971). Graph-theoretical methods for detecting and describing gestalt clusters. Computers, IEEE Transactions on, 100(1), 68–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options