Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing mathematics understanding and abstraction: The case of equivalence in the elementary years

  • Articles
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Generalising arithmetic structures is seen as a key to developing algebraic understanding. Many adolescent students begin secondary school with a poor understanding of the structure of arithmetic. This paper presents a theory for a teaching/learning trajectory designed to build mathematical understanding and abstraction in the elementary school context. The particular focus is on the use of models and representations to construct an understanding of equivalence. The results of a longitudinal intervention study with five elementary schools, following 220 students as they progressed from Year 2 to Year 6, informed the development of this theory. Data was gathered from multiple sources including interviews, videos of classroom teaching, and pre- and post-tests. Data reduction resulted in the development of nine conjectures representing a growth in integration of models and representations. These conjectures formed the basis of the theory.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aczel, J. (1998). Learning algebraic strategies using a computerised balance model. In A. Oliver & K. Newstead (Eds.),Proceedings of the 22nd conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp.1–16). Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baroody, A. J., & Ginsburg, H. P. (1983). The effects of instruction on children’s understanding of the equals sign.Elementary School Journal, 84, 199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Behr, M., Erlwanger, S., & Nichols, E. (1980). How children view the equals sign.Mathematics Teaching, 92, 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner J. S., (1966).Towards a theory of instruction. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T., Franke, M., & Levi, L. (2003).Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, D., (2007). Curriculum research: Towards a framework for a research based curriculum.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 35–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, T. J., & Warren, E. (2008). The effect of different representations on years 3 to 5 students’ ability to generalise.Zentralblatt fur Didaktik der Mathematik, 40(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davydov, V. V. (1975). The psychological characteristics of the “prenumeral” period of mathematics instruction. In L. P. Steffe (Ed.),Children’s capacity for learning mathematics (Vol VII, pp. 109–205). Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dienes, Z. P. (1961).On abstraction and generalisation. Boston: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, B., & Zilliox, J. (2003). Voyaging from theory and practice in teaching and learning: A view from Hawaii. In Pateman, N., Dougherty, B., & Zilliox, J. (Eds.),Proceedings of the 27th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 31–46). Hawaii: University of Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, T. (1991). Advanced mathematical thinking processes. In D. Tall (Ed.)Advanced mathematical thinking (pp.25–41). Dordtrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duval, R. (1999). Representations, vision and visualization: Cognitive functions in mathematical thinking. Basic issues for learning. In F. Hitt & M. Santos (Eds.),Proceedings of the 21st conference of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 3–26) Publisher.

  • English, L,, & Halford, G. (1995).Mathematics education: Models and processes. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • English, L. D., & Sharry, P. (1996). Analogical reasoning and the development of algebraic abstraction.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30, 135–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filloy, E., & Sutherland, R. (1996). Designing curricula for teaching and learning algebra. In A. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.),International Handbook of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 139–160). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuji, T. (2003). Probing students’ understanding of variables through cognitive conflict: Is the concept of a variable so difficult for students to understand? In N. Pateman, G. Dougherty & J. Zilliox (Eds.),Proceedings of the 27th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 47–65). Hawaii: University of Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fujii, T., & Stephens, M. (2001). Fostering understanding of algebraic generalisation through numerical expressions: The role of the quasi-variables. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.),The future of the teaching and learning of algebra. Proceedings of the 12th ICMI study conference (Vol. 1, pp. 258-64). Melbourne:

  • Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity.Psychological Science, 5 (3), 152–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halford, G. S. (1993).Children’s understanding: The development of mental models. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. Grouws (Ed.),Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65–97). New York: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaput, J. (2006). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.),Algebra in the early grades (pp. 5–17). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieran, K., & Chalouh, L. (1992). Prealgebra: The transition from arithmetic to algebra. In T. D. Owens (Ed.),Research ideas for the classroom: Middle grades mathematics (pp. 179–198). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linchevski, L. (1995). Algebra with number and arithmetics with letters: A definition of pre-algebra.Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 14, 69–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linchevski, L., & Herscovics, N. (1996). Crossing the cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebra: Operating on equations in the context of equations.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30, 36–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malara, N., & Navarra, G. (2003).ArAl Project: Arithmetic pathways towards favouring pre-algebraic thinking. Bologana, Italy: Pitagora Editrice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2006). Making use of children’s powers to produce algebraic thinking. In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.),Algebra in the early grades (pp. 57–94). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet, S., & Warren, E. (2000). Primary school teachers’ beliefs relating to teaching and assessing mathematics and factors that influence these beliefs.Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 2, 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pirie, S. E. B., & Martin, L. (1997). The equation, the whole equation, and nothing but the equation! One approach to the teaching of linear equations.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Study Authority. (2004).Mathematics Years 1–10 syllabus. Brisbane: Author: Retrieved 10 May 2009 www.qsa.qld.edu.au

    Google Scholar 

  • Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students’ types of generalisation.Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5, 37–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radford, L. (2006). Algebraic thinking and the generalisation of patterns: A semiotic perspective. Paper presented at the North America Chapter of 28th annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Merida, Mexico.

  • Saenz-Ludlow, A., & Walgamuth, C. (1998) Third graders’ interpretation of equality and the equal symbol.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35, 153–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scandura, J. M. (1971).Mathematics: Concrete behavioural foundations. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skemp, R. (1978). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding.Arithmetic Teacher, 26 (3), 9–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. (2006). Representational thinking as a framework for introducing functions in the elementary curriculum. In J. Kaput, D., Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.),Algebra in the early grades (pp. 133–160). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.),Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267–306). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, R., Sleeman, D. & Ktorza, D. (1991). Algebra students’ knowledge of equivalence of equations.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 112–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tall. D. (2004). Thinking through the three worlds of mathematics. In M. Hoines & A. Fuglestad (Eds.),Proceedings of the 28th conference of the International group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol. 4, pp. 281–288). Bergen, Norway: Bergen University College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of school algebra and uses of variables. In A. Coxford & A. P. Schulte (Eds.),Ideas of algebra, K-12 (pp. 8–19). Reston: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen. M. (2008).Realistic Mathematics Education as work in progress. Retrieved 7th May 2008 from http://www.fi.uu.nl/publicaties/literatuur/4966.pdf

  • Warren E. (2006). Learning comparative mathematical language in the elementary school: A longitudinal study.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62, 169–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, E., (2008, May).Early algebraic thinking: The case of equivalence in an early algebraic context. Keynote address to the conference on Future Curricular Trends in School Algebra and Geometry. The University of Chicago and The Field Museum, Chicago IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, E., & Cooper T. (2005). Young children’s ability to use the balance strategy to solve for unknowns.Mathematics Education Research Journal, 17 (1), 58–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, E., & Cooper T. J. (2008). Generalising the pattern rule for visual growth patterns: Actions that support 8 year olds’ thinking.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Elizabeth Warren, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Elizabeth Warren

  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Tom J. Cooper

Authors
  1. Elizabeth Warren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom J. Cooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Warren, E., Cooper, T.J. Developing mathematics understanding and abstraction: The case of equivalence in the elementary years. Math Ed Res J 21, 76–95 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217546

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217546

Keywords

Search

Navigation