Concepts associated with the equality symbol
- 1.2k Downloads
This paper looks at recent research dealing with uses of the equal sign and underlying notions of equivalence or non-equivalence among preschoolers (their intuitive nitions of equality), elementary and secondary school children, and college students. The idea that the equal sign is a “do something signal”1 (an operator symbol) persists throughout elementary school and even into junior high school. High schoolers' use of the equal sign in algebraic equations as a symbol for equivalence may be concealing a fairly tenuous grasp of the underlying relationship between the equal sign and the notion of equivalence, as indicated by some of the “shortcut” errors they make when solving equations.
This expression was first coined by Behr, Erlwanger and Nichols in their 1976 PMDC Technical Report (S. Erlwanger, personal communication, June 1980).
KeywordsHigh School College Student Personal Communication Elementary School Algebraic Equation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Behr, M., Erlwanger, S. and Nichols, E.: 1976, ‘How children view equality sentences’, PMDC Technical Report No. 3, Florida State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED144802).Google Scholar
- BrushL. R.: 1978, ‘Preschool children's knowledge of addition and subtraction’, Journal for Research in Mathermatics Education 9, 44–54.Google Scholar
- ByersV. and HerscovicsN.: 1977, Understanding school mathematics’, Mathematics Teaching 81, 24–27.Google Scholar
- Clement, J.: 1980, ‘Algebra word problem solutions: Analysis of a common misconception’, Paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Boston.Google Scholar
- Collis, K. F.: 1974, ‘Cognitive development and mathematics learning’, paper presented at Psychology of Mathematics Education Workshop, Centre for Science Education, Chelsea College, London.Google Scholar
- Denmark, T., Barco, E. and Voran, J.: 1976, ‘Final report: A teaching experiment on equality’, PMDC Technical Report No. 6, Florida State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED144805).Google Scholar
- Fuson, K. C.: 1979, ‘Counting solution procedures in addition and subtraction’, Paper presented at Wingspread Conference on the Initial Learning of Addition and Subtraction Skills, Racine, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
- GattegnoC. 1974, The Common Sense of Teaching Mathematics, Educational Solutions, New York.Google Scholar
- GelmanR. and GallistelC. R.: 1978, The Child's Understanding of Number, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- GinsburgH.: 1977, Children's Arithmetic, Van Nostrand, New York.Google Scholar
- HerscovicsN. and KieranC.: 1980, ‘Constructing meaning for the concept of equation’, The Mathematics Teacher 73, 572–580.Google Scholar
- Kieran, C.: 1979, ‘Children's operational thinking within the context of bracketing and the order of operations’, in Tall, D. (ed.) Proceedings of the Third International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Mathematics Education Research Centre, Warwick University, Coventry, England.Google Scholar
- Kieran, C.: 1980, ‘Constructing meaning for non-trivial equations’, Paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Boston. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED184899).Google Scholar
- SiegelL. S.: 1978 ‘The relationship of language and thought in the preoperational child: A reconsideration of nonverbal alternatives to Piagetian tasks’, in SiegelL. S. and BrainerdC. J. (eds.), Alternatives to Piaget, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
- VergnaudG., BenhadjJ. et DussouetA.: 1979, La Coordination de l'Enseignement des Mathématiques entre le cours moyen 2e année et la classe de sixième, Institut National de Recherche Pédagogique, France.Google Scholar