Abstract
This article presents a case study on a secondary mathematics teacher, Mary (pseudonym), and her design of a set of instructional tasks in the context of proportional reasoning. In keeping with the way Singapore teachers generally conceive of instructional planning, we investigated the connections between four comparison tasks she designed through her instructional goals. We adopt the use of an item-level lens to analyse the instructional goals of individual tasks, followed by a set-level lens to determine the movement in her instructional goals across tasks. The metaphors of overlaps and shifts describe how the movement of her instructional goals helped to advance students’ understanding of proportionality and to develop their proportional reasoning. Findings illustrate the usefulness of adopting the metaphors of overlaps and shifts and using two lenses to gain insights on teachers’ complex design processes. Additionally, they suggest that teachers’ understanding of student’s knowledge at the primary level is valuable for designing tasks that will ease students’ transition to secondary mathematics.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alatorre, S., & Figueras, O. (2005). A developmental model for proportional reasoning in ratio comparison tasks. In H. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 25–32). PME.
Attard, C. (2012). Transition from primary to second school mathematics: Students’ perceptions. Southeast Asian Mathematics Education Journal, 2(3), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.46517/seamej.v2i1.16.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554.
Brown, R. E., Weiland, T., & Orrill, C. H. (2019). Mathematics teachers’ use of knowledge resources when identifying proportional reasoning situations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(6), 1085–1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10006-3
Cheng, L. P., Leong, Y. H., & Toh, W. Y. K. (2021a). Sequencing of practice examples for mathematical reasoning: A case of a Singapore secondary school teacher’s practice. In B. Kaur & Y. H. Leong (Eds.), Mathematics Instructional Practices in Singapore Secondary Schools (pp. 249–277). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8956-0_13
Cheng, L. P., Leong, Y. H., & Toh, W. Y. K. (2021b). Singapore secondary school mathematics teachers’ selection and modification of instructional materials for classroom use. In B. Kaur & Y. H. Leong (Eds.), Mathematics Instructional Practices in Singapore Secondary Schools (pp. 205–230). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8956-0_11
Choy, B., & Dindyal, J. (2021). Productive teacher noticing and affordances of typical problems. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(1), 195–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01203-4.
Demonty, I., Vlassis, J., & Fagnant, A. (2018). Algebraic thinking, pattern activities and knowledge for teaching at the transition between primary and secondary school. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 99(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9820-9
Glassmeyer, D., Brakoniecki, A., & Amador, J. M. (2021). Identifying and supporting teachers’ robust understanding of proportional reasoning. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2021.100873
Gueudet, G., Bosch, M., diSessa, A. A., Kwon, O. N., & Verschaffel, L. (Eds.). (2016). Transitions in mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31622-2
Illustrative Mathematics. (2016, May). Comparing Growth, Variation 1. Illustrative mathematics: Learn maths for life. https://tasks.illustrativemathematics.org/content-standards/tasks/356
Jeannotte, D., & Kieran, C. (2017). A conceptual model of mathematical reasoning for school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9761-8
Karplus, R., Pulos, S., & Stage, E. K. (1983). Early adolescents’ proportional reasoning on ‘rate’ problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 14(3), 219–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00410539
Kaur, B. (2010). A study of mathematical tasks from three classrooms in Singapore. In Y. Shimizu, B. Kaur, R. Huang, & D. Clarke (Eds.), Mathematical Tasks in Classrooms Around the World (pp. 15–33). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789460911507_003
Kaur, B., Toh, T. L., Lee, N. H., Leong, Y. H., Cheng, L. P., Ng, K. E. D., Yeo, K. K. J., Yeo, B. W. J., Wong, L. F., Tong, C. L., Toh, W. Y. K., & Safii, L. (2019). Twelve questions on mathematics teaching: Snapshots from a study of the enacted school mathematics curriculum in Singapore. Nanyang Technological University.
Leong, Y. H., Cheng, L. P., & Toh, W. Y. K. (2021a). Use of challenging items in instructional materials by Singapore secondary school mathematics teachers. In B. Kaur & Y. H. Leong (Eds.), Mathematics Instructional Practices in Singapore Secondary Schools (pp. 231–248). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8956-0_12
Leong, Y. H., Cheng, L. P., Toh, W. Y. K., Kaur, B., & Toh, T. L. (2019). Making things explicit using instructional materials: A case study of a Singapore teacher’s practice. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(1), 47–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0240-z
Leong, Y. H., Cheng, L. P., Toh, W. Y. K., Kaur, B., & Toh, T. L. (2021b). Teaching students to apply formula using instructional materials: A case of a Singapore teacher’s practice. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 33(1), 89–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00290-1
Ministry of Education. (2019). Mathematics syllabuses: Secondary one to four (express and normal academic course). Singapore: Author.
Noelting, G. (1980). The development of proportional reasoning and the ratio concept. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11(3), 331–363.
Parish, L. (2010). Facilitating the development of proportional reasoning through teaching ratio. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 469–476). MERGA.
Project Maths Developmental Team. (2012). Teaching & learning plans: Ratio and proportion (junior certificate syllabus) https://www.projectmaths.ie/documents/T&L/RatioAndProportion.pdf
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
Remillard, J. T., & Heck, D. J. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(5), 705–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0600-4
Thompson, D. R. (2012). Modifying textbook exercises to incorporate reasoning and communication into the primary mathematics classroom. In B. Kaur & T. L. Toh (Eds.), Reasoning, Communication and Connections in Mathematics: Yearbook 2012, Association of Mathematics Educators (pp. 57–74). World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814405430_0003
Toh, W. Y. K., Leong, Y. H., & Cheng, L. P. (2021). Designing instructional materials to help students make connections: A case of a Singapore secondary school mathematics teachers' practice. In B. Kaur & Y. H. Leong (Eds.), Mathematics Instructional Practices in Singapore Secondary Schools (pp. 279–302). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8956-0_14
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
Watson, A., & Ohtani, M. (Eds.). (2015). Task design in mathematics education: An ICMI study 22. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2
Weiland, T., Orrill, C. H., Brown, R. E., & Nagar, G. G. (2019). Mathematics teachers’ ability to identify situations appropriate for proportional reasoning. Research in Mathematics Education, 21(3), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2019.1579668
Wong, L. F., & Low, L. (2020). Strategies to Foster Mathematical Reasoning and Communication. In N. H. Lee, C. Seto, & R. A. Rahim (Eds.), Mathematics Teaching in Singapore (Vol. 1, pp. 107–122). World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789811220159_0007
Yeo, J. B. W. (2017). Development of a framework to characterise the openness of mathematical tasks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(1), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9675-9
Yeo, J. B. W., Choy, B. H., Lim, L. G. P., & Wong, L. F. (2019). Innovative pedagogical practices. In T. L. Toh, B. Kaur, & E. G. Tay (Eds.), Mathematics Education in Singapore (pp. 165–193). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3573-0_8
Funding
The study reported in this paper is part of a larger research project known as “Big Ideas in School Mathematics Curriculum” (Grant number: OER 31/19 BK) funded by the Office of Educational Research, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. We would also like to acknowledge the funding from Nanyang Technological University Research Scholarships, awarded to the first author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
The research reported in this manuscript was cleared by the Ethics Committee of the Nanyang Technological University.
Informed consent
We obtained informed consent from all the subjects in the study reported in the manuscript. In the case of minors, the consent was also obtained from their guardians.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chin, S.L., Choy, B.H. & Leong, Y.H. Overlaps and shifts of instructional goals in the design of a set of mathematics tasks. Math Ed Res J 34, 523–549 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-022-00425-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-022-00425-x