Skip to main content
Log in

Enjoyment in learning mathematics: its role as a potential barrier to children’s perseverance in mathematical reasoning

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Enjoyment in learning mathematics is often perceived to be a positive, desirable emotion in the learning process. However, the findings of this study indicate that it can act as a barrier to persevering in mathematical reasoning by reinforcing a focus on habitual behaviours and inhibiting self-regulatory behaviours. The study identifies implications for practitioners; children’s limited perseverance in mathematical reasoning (PiMR) may be masked by expressions of enjoyment and willingness to keep striving. Hence, to notice children’s barriers to PiMR, teachers may need to look for children’s repetitious use of reasoning processes or limited movement between reasoning process rather than relying on emotion indicators or expressions of being stuck. The study focused on children, age 10–11, selected for their limited PiMR and sought to better understand the conditions when difficulties encountered in mathematical reasoning became barriers to successful PiMR. Data, collected in two English schools by observation and interview, related to children’s cognitive and affective responses and their active goals. A tripartite psychological classification was used to analyse children’s cognitive, affective and conative difficulties in mathematical reasoning and to analyse when these difficulties became barriers that children were unable to overcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2003). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In W. Kilpatrick (Ed.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 27–44). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, A. (2019). Perseverance in mathematical reasoning: The role of children’s conative focus in the productive interplay between cognition and affect. Research in Mathematics Education, 21(3), 271–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBellis, V. A., & Goldin, G. A. (2006). Affect and meta-affect in mathematical problem solving: A representational perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2011). Attitude towards mathematics: A bridge between beliefs and emotions. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(4), 471–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development (essays in social psychology). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. B. (2007). Connections between generalizing and justifying: Students’ reasoning with linear relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 194–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ely, M., Vinz, R., Downing, M., & Anzul, M. (1997). On writing qualitative research: Living by words. London, UK: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldin, G. (2000). Affective pathways and representation in mathematical problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(3), 209–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldin, G. A., Epstein, Y. M., Schorr, R. Y., & Warner, L. B. (2011). Beliefs and engagement structures: Behind the affective dimension of mathematical learning. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(4), 547–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goswami, U. (2015). Children’s cognitive development and learning. York, UK: Cambridge Primary Review Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannula, M. (2011). The structure and dynamics of affect in mathematical thinking and learning. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, University of Rzeszów, Poland.

  • Hannula, M. (2012). Exploring new dimensions of mathematics-related affect: Embodied and social theories. Research in Mathematics Education, 14(2), 137–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannula, M. (2019). Young learners’ mathematics-related affect: A commentary on concepts, methods, and developmental trends. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 100(3), 309–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J. (2003). Signposts for teaching mathematics through problem solving. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Prekindergarten-grade 6 (pp. 53–61). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huitt, W., & Cain, S. (2005). An overview of the conative domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/papers/conative.pdf. Accessed 13 December 2019.

  • Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lithner, J. (2008). A research famework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malmivuori, M. (2006). Affect and self-regulation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(Special Issue), 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J., Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (2010). Thinking mathematically (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J., Stephens, M., & Watson, A. (2009). Appreciating mathematical structure for all. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21(2), 10–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of 1: Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 51–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. California: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, M. F., Yankelewitz, D., & Maher, C. (2010). Promoting student reasoning through careful task design: A comparison of three studies. International Journal for Studies in Mathematics Education, 3, 135–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRICH (2019a). Magic Vs. Nrich, University of Cambridge. http://nrich.maths.org/6274. Accessed 20 June 2019.

  • NRICH (2019b). Number differences. Nrich, University of Cambridge. http://nrich.maths.org/2790/note. Accessed 20 June 2019.

  • Özcan, Z. Ç. (2016). The relationship between mathematical problem-solving skills and self-regulated learning through homework behaviours, motivation, and metacognition. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(3), 408–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pólya, G. (1959). Mathematics as a subject for learning plausible reasoning. Mathematics Teacher, 52, 7–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, D. A. (2002). Conjectures and refutations in grade 5 mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schukajlow, S., Leiss, D., Pekrun, R., Blum, W., Müller, M., & Messner, R. (2012). Teaching methods for modelling problems and students’ task-specific enjoyment, value, interest and self-efficacy expectations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 215–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, R., Corno, L., & Jackson, D. (1996). Individual differences in affective and conative functions. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 243–310). London, UK: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Somekh, B. (2006). Action research: A methodology for change and development. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, G. (2008). An analytic framework of reasoning-and-proving. For the Learning of Mathematics, 28(1), 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanner, H., & Jones, S. (2003). Self-efficacy in mathematics and students’ use of self-regulated learning strategies during assessment events. Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 275–282).

  • Williams, G. (2014). Optimistic problem-solving activity: Enacting confidence, persistence, and perseverance. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46(3), 407–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison Barnes.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barnes, A. Enjoyment in learning mathematics: its role as a potential barrier to children’s perseverance in mathematical reasoning. Educ Stud Math 106, 45–63 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09992-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09992-x

Keywords

Navigation