Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning about the numerator and denominator in teacher-designed lessons

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

Abstract

This study concerns pupils’ experience of unit and non-unit fractions of a discrete quantity during specially designed lessons. The aim was to explore pupils’ understanding of operations such as b/c of a in lessons where the teachers were aware of some pupils’ difficulties beforehand and what needed special attention. Five classes were involved in the study and 10 video-recorded lessons and written pre- and post-tests were analysed. Even though the lessons were designed for learning how to operate with both unit and non-unit fractions, we found that more pupils could solve items with unit fractions than with non-unit fractions. We found that few pupils in this study had difficulties with equal partitioning. Instead, it seemed difficult for some pupils to understand the role of the numerator and denominator and to differentiate between the amount of parts and the amount of objects in each part, and some pupils did not differentiate between the numbers of units and the amount of objects within a unit. This study identified some critical aspects that the pupils need to discern in order to learn how to operate with unit and non-unit fractions of a discrete quantity.

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

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Experience, seeing and understanding are used as synonyms.

References

  • Ball, D. L. (1993). Halves, pieces, and twoths: constructing and using represential contexts in teaching fractions. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integrating of research (pp. 157–195). Hillsdale,: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1992). Rational number, ratio, and proportion. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 296–333). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1993). Rational numbers: towards a symantic analysis - emphasis on the operator construct. In T. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 13–47). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brizuela, B. (2005). Young children’s notations for fractions. Educational studies in Mathematics, 62(1), 281–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. United States: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Empson, S. B. (1999). Equal sharing and shared meaning: the development of fraction concepts in a first-grade classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 17(3), 283–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Empson, S. B. (2011). On the idea of learning trajectories: promises and pitfalls. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 8(3), 571–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Empson, S. B., & Levi, L. (2011). Extending children’s mathematics: Fractions and decimals. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J., & Gibson, E. J. (1955). Perceptual learning: differentiation –or enrichment? Psychological Review, 62(1), 32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackenberg, A. J. (2007). Units coordination and the instruction of improper fractions: a revision of the splitting hypothesis. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 27–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häggström, J. (2008). Teaching systems of linear equations in Sweden and China: What is made possible to learn? (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 262). Göteborg Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

  • Kerslake, D. (1986). Fractions. A report of the strategies and errors in secondary mathematics project. Windsor: Nfer-Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieren, T. E. (1993). Rational and fractional numbers: From quotient fields to recursive understanding. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kullberg, A. (2010). What is taught and what is learned. Professional insights gained and shared by teachers of mathematics (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 293). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

  • Kullberg, A., Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2009). Variation within, and covariation between, representations. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & C. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 433–440). Thessaloniki: PME.

  • Lamon, S. J. (1996). The development of unitizing: its role in children’s partitioning strategies. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 170–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Murata, A. (2006). How should research contribute to instructional improvement? The case of lesson study. Educational Researcher, 35(3), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, M. L. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 323). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, N. K. (1993). Learning rational numbers with understanding: The case of informal knowledge. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research. Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography - describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Neuman, D. (1996). Phenomenography and children’s experience of division. In P. L. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Runesson, U., & Tsui, A. B. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

  • Mason, J. (2004). Researching your own practice. The discipline of noticing. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J. (2010). Noticing. Roots and branches. In M. Gamoran Sherin, V. R. Jacobs, & R. A. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teachers noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes. New york: Routlege.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, A. K., & Hiebert, J. (2011). Creating shared instructional products: an alternative approach to improving teaching. Educational Researcher, 40(1), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olive, J. (2011). Fractions on a dynamic number line. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 289–296). Ankara: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olive, J., & Vomvoridi, E. (2006). Making sense of instruction on fractions when students lacks necessary fractional schemes: the case of Tim. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25(1), 18–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pang, M. F. (2010). Boosting financial literacy: benefits from learning study. Instructional Science, 38(6), 659–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petit, M. M., Laird, R. E., & Marsden, E. L. (2010). A focus on fractions. Bringing research to the classroom. New York: Routhledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitkethly, A., & Hunting, R. (1996). A review of recent research in the area of initial fraction concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30(1), 5–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runesson, U. (1999). Variationens pedagogik. Skilda sätt att behandla ett matematiskt innehåll [The pedagogy of variation. Different ways of handling the same topic; in Swedish]. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

  • Runesson, U., & Mok, I. (2005). The teaching of fractions: a comperative study of a Swedish and a Hong Kong classroom. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffe, L. P. (2004). On construction of learning trajectories of children: the case of commensurate fractions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 129–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steffe, L. P., & Olive, J. (2010). Children’s fractional knowledge. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. W., & Saldanha, L. A. (2003). Fractions and multiplicative reasoning. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to the principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 95–114). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzur, R. (2004). Teacher and students’ joint production of a reversible fraction conception. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23(1), 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe, T. (1995). Coordination of units and understanding of simple fractions: case studies. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 7(2), 160–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, J. L. M., & Norton, A. (2011). The splitting loope. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(4), 386–416.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported in this article was supported financially by a grant from the Swedish National Research Council. We would like to thank Joanne Lobato, Cecilia Kilhamn and Marj Horne for their thoughtful comments on drafts of this paper. We especially thank the anonymous reviewers whose feedback contributed to a stronger article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pedagogical, Curricular and Professional Studies, University of Gothenburg, Box 300, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Angelika Kullberg

  2. School of Education and Communication, University of Jonkoping, HLK, 553 18, Jönköping, Sweden

    Ulla Runesson

  3. Wits School of Education, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

    Ulla Runesson

Authors
  1. Angelika Kullberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ulla Runesson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angelika Kullberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kullberg, A., Runesson, U. Learning about the numerator and denominator in teacher-designed lessons. Math Ed Res J 25, 547–567 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0080-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-013-0080-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation