Abstract
The paper presents an alternative explanation for the pattern of relative difficulty of arithmetical word problems to that suggested by Riley et al. (1983). Their view is based on the assumption that all symbolic manipulations take place internally. It is argued that for many problems much of the manipulation is accomplished externally.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Carpenter, T. P. and Moser, J. M.: 1982, ‘The development of addition and subtraction problem-solving skills’, in T. P.Carpenter et al. (eds.), Addition and Subtraction: A Cognitive Perspective, Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
Carpenter, T. P., Hiebert, J., and Moser, J. M.: 1983, ‘The effect of instruction on children's solution of addition and subtraction word problems’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 14, 55–72.
De Corte, E. and Verschaffel, L.: 1984, ‘First graders' solution processes in elementary word problems’, Proceedings of P.M.E. (N.A.), University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Hollander, S. K.: 1978, ‘A literature review: Thought processes employed in the solution of arithmetic word problems’, School Science and Mathematics 78, 327–34.
Jerman, M.: 1973–4, ‘Problem length as a structural variable in verbal arithmetic problems’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 5, 109–23.
Jerman, M. and Rees, R.: 1972, ‘Predicting the relative difficulty of verbal arithmetic problems’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 4, 306–23.
Riley, M. S.: 1981, Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Development, Masters Thesis, University of Pittsburgh.
Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., and Heller, J. I.: 1983, ‘Development of children's problem solving ability in arithmetic’, in H.Ginsburg (ed.), The Development of Mathematical Thinking, Academic Press, New York.
Wolters, M. A. D.: 1983, ‘The part-whole schema and arithmetical problems’, Educational Studies in Mathematics 14, 127–38.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Langford, P.E. Arithmetical word problems: Thinking in the head versus thinking on the table. Educ Stud Math 17, 193–199 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311520
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311520