Skip to main content

Cost, price and profit: what influences students’ decisions about fundraising?

Abstract

This article examines some of the complexities associated with developing financially literate, enterprising young Australians through school education. We aimed to explore what seems to influence students in pricing goods for sale within their school community. Data were collected from more than 300 years 5 and 6 students (10–12 years of age) in four government primary schools in urban Darwin. Students were asked to respond to problem contexts involving fundraising as an example of an enterprise activity. The findings reveal that familiarity with fundraising initiatives, personal values, and language and literacy skills shaped the responses students gave. Students who gave loss-making and break-even responses were price conscious, but also tended to confuse terminology influencing mathematisation—i.e., “cost”, “price” and “profit”. Students who gave profit-making responses applied reasoning that was mathematical, financial and entrepreneurial, giving explanations that distinguished between these terms. We argue that these insights contribute to our understanding how upper primary school students interpret and respond to financial problems, with useful implications for schools and teachers.

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

References

  1. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: a decade of progress in education research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Appleyard, L., & Rowlingson, K. (2013). Children and financial education: challenges for developing financial capability in the classroom. Social Policy & Society, 12(4), 507–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA] (2017). Australian Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

  4. Australian Securities & Investments Commission [ASIC] (2011). Report 229: National Financial Literacy Strategy. Retrieved from http://www.financialliteracy.gov.au/media/218312/national-financial-literacy-strategy.pdf

  5. Australian Securities & Investments Commission [ASIC] (2014). National Financial Literacy Strategy 2014–2017. Retrieved from http://www.financialliteracy.gov.au/media/546585/report-403_national-financial-literacy-strategy-2014-17.pdf

  6. Australian Securities & Investments Commission [ASIC] (2016). MoneySmart Teaching. Retrieved from https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/teaching

  7. Blue, L. E., O’Brien, M., & Makar, K. (2017). Exploring classroom practices that may enable a compassionate approach to financial literacy education. Mathematics Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0223-5.

  8. Blue, L. E., & Pinto, L. E. (2017). Other ways of being: Challenging dominant financial literacy discourses in aboriginal context. Australian Educational Researcher, 44(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-017-0226-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Boaler, J. (1994). When do girls prefer football to fashion? An analysis of female underachievement in relation to 'realistic' mathematics context. British Educational Research Journal, 20, 551–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chell, E. (2007). Social enterprise and entrepreneurship: Towards a convergent theory of the entrepreneurial process. International Small Business Journal, 25(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242607071779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble. (2003). Design experiments in education research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fayolle, A., & Gailly, B. (2008). From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education. Journal of European Industrial Training, 32(7), 569–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Foundation for Young Australians (2016). Enterprise skills and careers education in schools: Why Australia needs a national strategy. Retrieved from https://www.fya.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Enterprise-skills-and-careers-education-why-Australia-needs-a-national-strategy_April2016.pdf

  14. Foundation for Young Australians (2017). The new basics: Big data reveal the skills young people need for the new work order. Retrieved from https://www.fya.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/The-New-Basics_Update_Web.pdf

  15. Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(4), 638–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaplan, C. A., & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. Cognitive Psychology, 22(3), 374–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kyttälä, M. & Björn, P. M. (2014). The role of literacy skills in adolescents’ mathematics word problem performance: Controlling for visuo-spatial ability and mathematics anxiety. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 59–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lappan, G., Fey, T., Fitzgerald, W. M., Friel, S., & Phillips, E. D. (2006). Connected mathematics 2: Implementing and teaching guide. Boston: Pearson, Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs [MCEECDYA] (2011). National Consumer and Financial Literacy Framework (Revised 2009). Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Consumer_Financial_Literacy_Framework_FINAL.pdf

  20. MoneySmart Teaching (2017). Innovation and enterprising behaviours: A case study. Retrieved from https://www.moneysmart.gov.au/media/558470/innovationandenterprisingbehaviouscasestudyfinal.pdf

  21. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2009). Learning mathematics for life: A perspective from PISA. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2016). PISA 2015 results (volume II): Policies and practices for successful schools. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264267510-en.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Parkin, B., & Hayes, J. (2006). Scaffolding the language of maths. Literacy learning: The middle years, 14(1), 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pimperton, H., & Nation, K. (2010). Understanding words, understanding numbers: An exploration of the mathematical profiles of poor comprehenders. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 255–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pinto, L. E., & Blue, L. E. (2016). Pushing the entrepreneurial prodigy: Canadian aboriginal entrepreneurship education initiatives. Critical Studies in Education, 57(3), 358–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sawatzki, C. (2013). What financial dilemmas reveal about students' social and mathematical understandings. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Mathematics education: Yesterday, today and tomorrow, Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 602–609). Melbourne: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Sawatzki, C. (2014). Connecting social and mathematical thinking: The use of “real life” contexts. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.), Curriculum in Focus: Research Guided Practice, Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 557–564). Sydney: MERGA.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sawatzki, C. (2017). Lessons in financial literacy task design: Authentic, imaginable, useful. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-016-0184-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sawatzki, C. & Sullivan, P. (2017). Shopping for shoes: Teaching students to apply and interpret mathematics in the real world. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9833-.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2006). Design experiments. In P. B. Elmore, G. Camilli, & J. Green (Eds.), Complementary methods for research in education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Seah, W. T. (2016). Values in the mathematics classroom: Supporting cognitive and affective pedagogical ideas. Pedagogical Research, 1(2), 53. https://doi.org/10.20897/lectito.201653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sheldon, S., McAndrews, M. P., & Moscovitch, M. (2011). Episodic memory processes mediated by the medial temporal lobes contribute to open-ended problem-solving. Neuropsychologia, 49(9), 2439–2447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shim, S., Xiao, J. J., Barber, B. L., & Lyons, A. C. (2009). Pathways to life success: A conceptual model of financial well-being for young adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 708–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2009.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Spike Innovation for the Office of the Chief Scientist (2015). Boosting high-impact entrepreneurship in Australia: A role for universities. Retrieved from http://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2015/10/new-report-boosting-high-impact-entrepreneurship-in-australia/

  35. Stacey, K. (2015). The real world and the mathematical world. In K. Stacey & R. Turner (Eds.), Assessing mathematical literacy. The PISA experience (pp. 57–84). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Stillman, G. (1998). The emperor's new clothes? Teaching and assessment of mathematical applications at the senior level. In P. Galbraith, W. Blum, G. Booker, & D. Huntley (Eds.), Mathematical modelling: Teaching and assessment in a technology-rich world (pp. 243–253). Chichester: Horwood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (2nd ed.). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sullivan, P., Askew, M., Cheeseman, J., Clarke, D., Mornane, A., Roche, A., & Walker, N. (2014). Supporting teachers in structuring mathematics lessons involving challenging tasks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9279-2.

  39. Sullivan, P., Borcek, C., Walker, N., & Rennie, M. (2016). Exploring a structure for mathematics lessons that initiate learning by activating cognition on challenging tasks. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 41, 159–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2006). Teacher actions to maximise mathematics learning opportunities in heterogeneous classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-005-9002-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Thomson, S., & de Bortoli, L. (2017). PISA 2015: Financial literacy in Australia. Camberwell: ACER.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology, 26(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Vale, C., Atweh, B., Averill, R., & Skourdoumbis, A. (2016). Equity, social justice and ethics in mathematics education. In K. Makar, S. Dole, J. Visnovska, M. Goos, A. Bennison, & K. Fry (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia (pp. 2012–2015). Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2005). The role of contexts in assessment problems in mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 25(2), 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Verschaffel, L., deCorte, E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word problems. Learning and Instruction, 4, 273–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Vilenius-Tuohimaa, P., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2008). The association between mathematical word problems and reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 28, 409–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zevenbergen, R. (2000). Language Implications for Numeracy: A Study of Language Use of Disadvantaged Students. Paper presented at the ACER Research Conference ‘Improving Numeracy Learning: What does the research tell us?’ Melbourne.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The project acknowledges the generous participation of the project schools. The views expressed are those of the authors.

Funding

The EPMC project was funded through an Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP110101027).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carly Sawatzki.

Ethics declarations

Disclaimer

The views expressed are those of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sawatzki, C., Goos, M. Cost, price and profit: what influences students’ decisions about fundraising?. Math Ed Res J 30, 525–544 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0241-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Realistic mathematics
  • Numeracy
  • Financial mathematics
  • Financial literacy
  • Problem-solving