• Ali DeliceEmail author
  • Mahmut Kertil


This article reports the results of a study that investigated pre-service mathematics teachers’ modelling processes in terms of representational fluency in a modelling activity related to a cassette player. A qualitative approach was used in the data collection process. Students’ individual and group written responses to the mathematical modelling activity, video-taped and transcribed group discussions, and classroom observations, were the main sources of data. This study was conducted during the spring semester in 2010. Fifty-five pre-service teachers were the participants in the study. Systematic coding and descriptive statistics were used in analysing the data. The data showed that a difficulty with modelling was closely related to the difficulty in the transformation of semiotic representations. During the modelling process, the two types of transformations, which were the treatments within a register and conversions between registers, occurred concurrently. In addition, the challenging and motivating nature of the modelling process in terms of directing participants to form consistent transformations between and within different representation registers was observed.

Key words

mathematical modelling problem solving representational fluency semiotic representations transformation of representations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Blum, W. & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modelling, application, and links to other subjects-state, trends, and issues in mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blum, W. (2002). ICMI study 14: Applications and modelling in mathematics education-discussion document. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51, 149–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carrejo, D. J. & Marshall, J. (2007). What is mathematical modelling? Prospective teachers’ use of experiments to connect mathematics to the study of motion. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 19(1), 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Creswel, J. W. (2003). Research design; qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). India: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Cramer, K. (2003). Using a translation model for curriculum development and classroom instruction. In R. Lesh & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modelling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 449–463). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Doerr, H. M. (1997). Experiment, simulation and analysis: An integrated instructional approach to the concept of force. International Journal of Science Education, 19(3), 265–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Doerr, H. M. (2007). What knowledge do teachers need for teaching mathematics through applications and modelling? In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H. W. Henn & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI Study (pp. 69–79). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Department for Education (DFE). (1997). Mathematics in the national curriculum. London: DFE Welch Office.Google Scholar
  10. Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elia, I., Gagatsis, A. & Demetriou, A. (2007a). The effects of different modes of representation on the solution of one-step additive problems. Learning and Instruction, 17, 658–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elia, I., Panaoura, A., Eracleous, A. & Gagatsis, A. (2007b). Relations between secondary pupils’ conceptions about functions and problem solving in different representations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(3), 533–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. English, L. (2003). Reconciling theory, research, and practice: A models and modelling perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54, 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldin, G. A. (1998). Representational systems, learning, and problem solving in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 137–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gravemeijer, K. & Stephan, M. (2002). Emergent models as an instructional design heuristic. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. Oers & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modelling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 145–169). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Greer, B. (1997). Modelling reality in mathematics classrooms: The case of word problems. Learning and Instruction, 7(4), 293–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Johnson, T. & Lesh, R. (2003). A models and modelling perspective on technology-based representational media. In R. Lesh & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modelling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 265–278). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Kaiser, G. & Sriraman, B. (2006). A global survey of international perspectives on modelling in mathematics education. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik (ZDM), 38(3), 302–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kertil, M., Delice, A. & Aydin, E. (2009). Investigating representational fluency in modelling process: The experience of pre-service teachers with a cassette problem. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou & C. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 305–312). Thessaloniki, Greece: PME.Google Scholar
  20. Lesh, R. (1999). The development of representational abilities in middle school mathematics. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Development of mental representation: Theories and application (pp. 323–350). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Lesh, R. & Doerr, H. M. (2003). Foundations of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching, learning, and problem solving. In R. Lesh & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modelling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching (pp. 3–33). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  22. Lesh, R. & Harel, G. (2003). Problem solving, modelling, and local conceptual development. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5, 157–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lesh, R. & Lehrer, R. (2003). Models and modelling perspectives on the development of students and teachers. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 5(2&3), 109–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A. & Post, T. (2000). Principles for developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers. In R. Lesh & A. Kelly (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 591–645). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Lingefjärd, T. (2000). Mathematical modelling by prospective teachers. Electronically published doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia. Can be downloaded from
  26. Lingefjärd, T. (2002). Mathematical modelling for pre-service teachers: A problem from anaesthesiology. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7, 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  28. Nunes, T., Schliemann, A. D. & Carraher, D. W. (1993). Mathematics in the streets and in schools. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Oliveira, A. M. P. & Barbosa, J. C. (2009). Mathematical modelling and the teachers’ tensions. In R. Lesh, P. Galbraith, C. Haines & A. Hurford (Eds.), Modelling students’ modelling competencies (pp. 511–517). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Reusser, K. & Stebler, R. (1997). Every word problem has a solution—the social rationality of mathematical modelling in schools. Learning and Instruction, 7(4), 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Santos, A. G. D., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2001). Representational fluency and symbolisation of derivative. Proceedings of the Sixth Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics, Melbourne, 282–291. Google Scholar
  32. Schorr, R. Y., & Lesh, R. (2003). A modeling approach for providing teacher development. In R. Lesh & H. M. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: A models and modeling perspective (pp. 141–157). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  33. Sfard, A. (1995). The development of algebra: Confronting historical and psychological perspectives. Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 14, 15–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sriraman, B. & Lesh, R. (2006). Modelling conceptions revisited. ZDM–The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 38, 247–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Suh, P. & Moyer, P. S. (2007). Developing students’ representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 155–173.Google Scholar
  36. Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (TTKB). (2005). Ortaöğretim matematik (9, 10, 11 ve 12. sınıflar) dersi öğretim programı. Ankara, Türkiye: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.Google Scholar
  37. Zbiek, R. M. & Conner, A. (2006). Beyond motivation: Exploring mathematical modelling as a context for deepening students’ understandings of curricular mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69, 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zbiek, R. M., Heid, M. K., Blume, G. W. & Dick, T. P. (2007). Research on technology in mathematics education: The perspective of constructs. In F. Lester (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 1169–1207). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Atatürk Faculty of Education, Secondary School Science and Mathematics Education DepartmentMarmara UniversityKadikoyTurkey
  2. 2.Secondary School Science and Mathematics Education DepartmentMarmara UniversityKadikoyTurkey

Personalised recommendations