A follow-up assessment of a second-grade problem-centered mathematics project

Abstract

Five second-grade classes in two schools participated in a project that was generally compatible with a constructivist theory of knowing. At the end of the school year, the students in these classes and their peers in six non-project classes in the same schools were assigned to ten textbook-based third-grade classes on the basis of reading scores. The two groups of students were compared at the end of the third-grade year on a standardized achievement test and on instruments designed to assess their conceptual development in arithmetic, their personal goals in mathematics, and their beliefs about reasons for success in mathematics. The levels of computation performance on familiar textbook tasks were comparable, but former project students had attained more advanced levels of conceptual understanding. In addition, they held stronger beliefs about the importance of working hard and being interested in mathematics, and about understanding and collaborating. Further, they attributed less importance to conforming to the solution methods of others.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Addison-Wesley Mathematics Teacher's Resource Book, Book 3: 1987, Addison-Wesley, Menlo Park, CA.

  2. Barnes, D.: 1976,From Communication to Curriculum, Penguin, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bartolini Bussi, M. B.: 1991, “Social interaction and mathematical knowledge”. In F. Furinghetti (ed.),Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Program Committee of the 15th PME Conference, Genoa, Italy, pp. 1–16.

  4. Bauersfeld, H.: 1980, “Hidden dimensions in the so-called reality of a mathematics classroom”,Educational Studies in Mathematics 11, 23–41.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bauersfeld, H.: 1988, “Interaction, construction, and knowledge: Altemative perspectives for mathematics education”. In T. Cooney and D. Grouws (eds.),Effective Mathematics Teaching, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics/Lawrence Erlbaum, Reston, VA, pp. 27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bishop, A. J.: 1985, “The social construction of meaning — A significant development for mathematics education?”,For the Learning of Mathematics 5(1), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bishop, A. J.: 1988,Mathematical Enculturation: A Cultural Perspective on Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Blumer, H.: 1969,Symbolic Interactionism: Perspectives and Method, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brousseau, G.: 1984, “The crucial role of the didactical contract in the analysis and construction of situations in teaching and learning mathematics”. In H. G. Steiner (ed.),Theory of Mathematics Education (Occasional paper 54), IDM, Bielefeld, pp. 110–119.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bruner, J.: 1986,Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Carpenter, T. P. Fennema, E., Peterson, P. L., Chiang, C., and Loef, M.: 1989, “Using knowledge of children's mathematics in press thinking in classroom teaching: An experimental study”,American Educational Research Journal 26, 499–532.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Carpenter, T. P. and Moser, J. M.: 1984, “The acquisition of addition and subtraction concepts in grades one through three”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 15, 179–202.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cobb, P. and Wheatley, G.: 1988, “Childen's initial understandings of ten”,Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 10(3), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cobb, P., Wood, T., and Yackel, E.: 1991a, “A constructivist approach to second grade mathematics”. In E.von Glasersfeld (ed.),Constructivism in Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 157–176.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cobb, P., Wood, T. and Yackel, E.: 1991b, “Analogies from the philosophy and sociology of science for understanding classroom life”,Science Education 75, 23–44.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cobb, P., Wood, T., and Yackel, E.: in press-a, “Discourse, mathematical thinking, and classroom practice”. In E. Forman, N. Minick, and A. Stone (eds.),Contexts for Learning: Sociocultural Dynamics in Children's Development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

  17. Cobb, P., Wood, T., and Yackel, E.: in press-b, “Learning and interaction in classroom situations”,Educational Studies in Mathematics.

  18. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., and Perlwitz, M.: 1991, “Assessment of a problem-centered second grade mathematics project”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 22, 3–29.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., and Wood, T.: 1988, “Curriculum and teacher development: Psychological and anthropological perspectives”. In E. Fennema, T. P. Carpenter, and S. J. Lamon (eds.),Integrating Research on Teaching and Learning Mathematics, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, pp. 92–131.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., and Wood, T.: 1989, “Young children's emotional acts while doing mathematical problem solving”. In D. B. McLeod and V. M. Adams (eds.),Affect and Mathematical Problem Solving: A New Perspective, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 117–148.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., and Wood, T.: 1982, “A constructivist altemative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,23(1), 2–33.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cobb, P., Yackel, E., Wood, T., and McNeal, B.: 1992, “Mathematics as procedural instructions and mathematics as meaningful activity: The reality of teaching for understanding”. In R.B. Davis and C.A. Maher (eds.),Schools, Mathematics and the World of Reality, Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA, pp. 119–133.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Confrey, J.: 1986, “A critique of teacher effectiveness research in mathematics education”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 17, 347–360.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Confrey, J.: 1990a, “What constructivism implies for teaching”. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, and N. Noddings (eds.),Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No. 4), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, pp. 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Confrey, J.: 1990b, “Student conceptions, representations, and the design of software”. InDesign for Learning Apple Computer, External Research, Cupertino, CA, pp. 55–62.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kamii, C. and de Clark, G.: 1985,Young Children Reinvent Arithmetic: Implications of Piaget's Theory, Teachers College Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kaput, J. J.: 1991, “Notations and representations as mediators of constructive processes”. In E.von Glasersfeld (ed.),Constructivism in Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 53–74).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lampert, M.: 1990, “When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching”,American Educational Research Journal 27, 29–63.

    Google Scholar 

  29. McNeal, B.: 1991,The Social Context of Mathematical Development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

  30. Mead, G. H.: 1934,Mind, Self, and Society, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mehan, H.: 1979,Learning Lessons, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Minick, N.: 1989, “Mind and activitty in Vygotsky's work: An expanded frame of reference”,Cultural Dynamics 2, 162–187.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Newman, D., Griffin, P., and Cole, M.: 1989,The Construction Zone: Working for Cognitive Change in School, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nicholls, J., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., and Patashnik, M.: 1990, “Dimensions of success in mathematics: Individual and classroom differences”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 21, 109–122.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Perret-Clermont, A. N.: 1980,Social Interaction and Cognitive Development in Children, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Piaget, J.: 1971,Biology and Knowledge, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Piaget, J.: 1980,Adaptation and Intelligence: Organic Selection and Phenocopy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Richards, J.: 1991, “Mathematical discussions”. In E.von Glasersfeld (ed.),Constructivism in Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 13–52.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rogoff, B.: 1990,Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Rorty, R.: 1983, “Method and morality”. In N. Haan, R. N. Bellah, and P. Robinson (eds.),Social Science as Moral Inquiry, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 155–176.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Saxe, G. B.: 1991,Culture and Cognitive Development: Studies on Mathematical Understanding, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Schütz, A.: 1962,The Problem of Social Reality, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Silver, E. A.: 1986, “Using conceptual and procedural knowledge: A focus on relationships”. In J. Hiebert (ed.),Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 181–198.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Sinclair, H.: 1990, “Learning: The interactive recreation of knowledge”. In L. P. Steffe and T. Wood (eds.),Transforming Children's Mathematics Education: International Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 19–29.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Smith, E. and Confrey, J.: 1991,Understanding Collaborative Learning: Small-Group Work on Contextual Problems Using a Multi-Representational Software Tool. Paper presented at AERA annual meeting, Chicago, April.

  46. Steffe, L. P.: 1987,Principles of Mathematical Curriculum Design in Early Childhood Teacher Education. Paper presented at AERA annual meeting, Washington, DC, April.

  47. Steffe, L. P., Cobb, P. (with E. von Glasersfeld):. 1988,Construction of Arithmetical Meanings and Strategies, Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Steffe, L. P., von Glasersfeld, E., Richards, J., and Cobb, P.: 1983,Children's Counting Types: Philosophy, Theory and Applications, Praeger Scientific, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Streeck, J.: 1979, “Sandwich. Good for you”. In J. Dittman (ed.),Arbeiten zur Konversationsanalyse: Neimeyer, Tübingen, pp. 235–257.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Thompson, P.: 1985, “Experience, problem solving, and learning mathematics: Considerations in developing mathematical curricula”. In E. A. Silver (ed.),Teaching and Learning Mathematical Problem Solving: Multiple Research Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 189–236.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Treffers, A.: 1987,Three dimensions: A Model of Goal and Theory Description in Mathematics Instruction—The Wiskobas Project, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Voigt, J.: 1985, “Patterns and routines in classroom interaction”,Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques 6, 69–118.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Voigt, J.: 1989, “The social constitution of the mathematics province-A microethnographical study in classroom interaction”,The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition 11(1/2), 27–34.

    Google Scholar 

  54. von Glasersfeld, E.: 1984a, “An introduction to radical constructivism”. In P. Watzlawick (ed.),The Invented Reality, Norton, New York, pp. 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  55. von Glasersfeld, E.: 1984b, “Thoughts about space, time, and the concept of identity”. InBook-Conference, First Installment, Princelet Editions Living Books, Zurich, pp. 21–36

    Google Scholar 

  56. von Glasersfeld, E.: 1990a, “Constructivism in mathematics education: Why some like it radical”. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, and N. Noddings (eds.),Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph No. 4), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, pp. 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  57. von Glasersfeld, E.: 1990b, “Environment and communication”. In L. P. Steffe and T. Wood (eds.),Transforming Children's Mathematics Education: International Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 30–38.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Wood, T., Cobb, P., and Yackel, E.: 1990, “The contextual nature of teaching: Mathematics and reading instruction in one second-grade classroom”,Elementary School Journal 90, 497–514.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wood, T., Cobb, P., and Yackel, E.: 1991, “Change in teaching mathematics: A case study”,American Educational Research Journal 28(3), 587–616.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Wood, T., Cobb, P., and Yackel, E.: 1992, “Change in learning mathematics: Change in teaching mathematics”. In H. Marshall (ed.),Redefining Student Learning: Roots of Educational Change, Ablex, Norwood, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Wood, T. and Yackel, E.: 1990, “The development of collaborative dialogue within small group interactions”. In L. P. Steffe and T. Wood (eds.),Transforming Children's Mathematics Education: International Perspectives, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Yackel, E., Cobb, P., and Wood, T.: 1991, “Small group interactions as a source of learning opportunities in second grade mathematics”,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 22(5), 390–408.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E. et al. A follow-up assessment of a second-grade problem-centered mathematics project. Educ Stud Math 23, 483–504 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00571469

Download citation

Keywords

  • Solution Method
  • Conceptual Understanding
  • Conceptual Development
  • Computation Performance
  • Personal Goal