Chapter 2

BACKGROUND FOR THE STUDY

Theories of mathematical learning and understanding

According to Romberg (Grouws, 1992), there is no general agreement on

the definition of learning, how learning takes place and what constitutes
reasonable evidence that learning has taken place. Some say it is
observable changes in behavior, others that it means acquiring new
knowledge, and other say that it is the creating of a disequilibrium.

Psychologists have made different philosophic assumptions about the

nature of the learning process. Those who hold that learning is determined
by the forming connections between the environment stimuli and useful
responses are called associationist. A representative of this view, E.B.
Thorndike (1922), recommended that in mathematics, for example,
students perform much drill and practice on correct procedures and facts
to strengthen correct mental bonds. Associationists also argued that
curricula should be structured to keep related concepts well separated, so
that students did not form incorrect ties.

By 1943, the behaviorists were maintaining that a real science of

education could be built only on direct observation. Absent from the
research and discourse of behaviorists were "thinking", "meaning" or other
such unobservable and possibly nonexistent phenomena. Though
behaviorists, led by B.F. Skinner, denied the theory of "mental bonds" that
associationist had put forth, their prescriptions for mathematics teaching
were similar: drill and practice, with reinforcement by reward for desirable
behavior in the form of correct answers and punishment for undesired
behavior. The behaviorists brought to the educational scene programmed
learning curricula and new standardized testing techniques. In the study of
teaching "process-product" researchers searched for types of teaching
behavior that led to greater student achievement.

During that same time there existed other views of knowledge and
learning. In 1916 Dewey said that "It is that reconstruction or
reorganization of experience which adds to the meaning of experience,
and which increases ability to direct the course of subsequent experience"
(p.89). In another occasion Dewey (1938) wrote that "I use the word
understanding rather than knowledge because ...knowledge to so many
people means 'information.' Information is knowledge about things (it is
static), and there is no guarantee that understanding-the spring of

intelligent action-will follow from it"(p.48). Brownell (1935) maintained that

although incidental learning could help counteract the practice of teaching
mathematics as an isolated subject, it did not provide an organization in
which "the meaningful concepts and intelligent skills requisite to real
arithmetical ability" could be developed. Brownell wrote about a theory of
instruction in which making "sense" of what was learned was the central
issue in arithmetic instruction. Piaget and his coworkers who interviewed
hundreds of children, proposed that in learning, children pass through
developmental stages and that the use of active methods which gives
scope to spontaneous research by the child help him rediscover or
reconstruct what is to be learned "not simply imparted to him" (Piaget,
1973, p.23).

Piaget's research and theory, is called developmental constructivism

(Romberg, 1969), and maintains that children acquire number concepts
and operations by construction from the inside and not by internalization.
Piaget (1968) pointed out that every normal student is capable of good
mathematical reasoning if attention (and care) is directed to activities of
his interest, and if by this method the emotional inhibitions that too often
give him a feeling of inferiority in lessons in mathematics are removed.

In contrast to Piaget's explanation of construction, Vygotsky (1986)

presented an alternate theory where imbalance and not equilibrium is
considered normal.

Jean Piaget's Theory of Learning

According to Jean Piaget (1979), human intellectual development

progresses chronologically through four sequential stages. The order in
which the stages occur have been found to be largely invariant, however
the ages at which people enter each higher order stage vary according to
each person's hereditary and environmental characteristics.
Piaget defined intelligence as the ability to adapt to the environment.
Adaptation takes place through assimilation and through accommodation,
with the two processes interacting throughout life in different ways,
according to the stage of mental development.

In assimilation, the individual absorbs new information, fitting features of

the environment into internal cognitive structures. In accommodation, the
individual modifies those internal cognitive structures to conform to the
new information and meet the demands of the environment. A balance is
maintained through equilibration, as the individual organizes the demands
of the environment in terms of previously existing cognitive structures. A
child moves from one stage of cognitive development to another through

the process of equilibration, through understanding the underlying

concept so that the understanding can be applied to new situations.
Equilibration is a balance between assimilation and accommodation.

The stages of cognitive development that Piaget distinguished are four:

(Piaget, 1968)
Sensorimotor (0-2 years of age) - children begin to use imitation, memory
and thought. They begin to recognize that objects do not cease to exist
when they are hidden from view. They move from reflex actions to goaldirected activity.
Preoperational (2-7 years) - Children gradually develop language and the
ability to think in symbolic form. They are able to think operations through
logically in one direction and they have difficulty seeing another persons
point of view.
Concrete operational (7-11 years) - Children are able to solve concrete
(hands-on) problems in logical fashion. They understand the laws of
conservation and are able to classify and seriate. They also understand
reversibility.
Formal operational (11-15 years of age) - Children are able to solve
abstract problems in logical fashion. Their thinking becomes more
scientific, they develop concerns about social issues and about identity.

Piaget suggested that when children do not understand or have difficulty

with a certain concept, it is due to a too-rapid passage from the qualitative
structure of the problem (by simple logical reasoning -e.g. a ball existing
physically) to the quantitative or mathematical formulation (in the sense
of differences, similarity, weight, number, etc.). Conditions that can help
the child in his search for understanding according to Piaget is the use of
active methods that permit the child to explore spontaneously and require
that "new truths" be learned, rediscovered or at least reconstructed by the
student not simply told to him (Piaget,1968). He pointed out that the role
of the teacher is that of facilitator and organizer who creates situations
and activities that present a problem to the student. The teacher must
also provide counterexamples that lead children to reflect on and
reconsider hasty solutions. Piaget argued that a student who achieves a
certain knowledge through free investigation and spontaneous effort will
later be able to retain it. He will have acquired a methodology that serves
him for the rest of his life and will stimulate his curiosity without risk of
exhausting it.

A third type of knowledge that Piaget suggests is social or conventional

knowledge. He said that it is always through the external educational
action of family surroundings that the young child learns language, which
Piaget (1973) called is an "expression of collective values." Piaget pointed

out that without external social transmission (which is also educational)

the continuity of collective language remains practically impossible.
There are three types of feelings or emotional tendencies, according to
Piaget, that affect the ethical life of the child, that are first found in his
mental constitution. In the first place is the need for love, which plays a
basic role in development in various forms from the cradle to adolescence.
There is a feeling of fear of those who are bigger and stronger than
himself, which plays an important role in his conduct. The third is mixed,
composed of affection and fear at the same time. It is the feeling of
respect that is very important in the formation or exercise of moral
conscience.

Noddings (1990a) points out certain characteristics that constructivist

teachers must have an ethical commitment to inquiry in order to aid
students in their investigations, and the receptivity and responsiveness of
an ethic of care which involves sharing and listening to students, taking
interest in their purposes as well as in those of the teachers' truth.

A constructivist view of knowledge implies that knowledge is continuously

created and reconstructed so that there can be no template for
constructivist teaching (Peterson & Knapp, 1993). Since this point of view
holds that learning involves student's constructing their own knowledge,
this leads to a redefinition of the teachers' role to one of facilitator. This
also leads to teaching that emphasizes the importance of listening to and
valuing students' perception, even when their understanding differs from
conventional knowledge (Cochran, Barson & Davis, 1970).

Mathematical understanding and number sense

Cognitive scientists and mathematics educators who favor the cognitive

science approach have moved well beyond Piaget in describing the way
the mind operates. There has been a shift from an organic language of
Piaget to a language "highly colored" of computers, (Noddings 1990b) with
words such as networks, connections, paths, frames, etc.

As a cognitive position, constructivism maintains that all knowledge is

constructed, as Piaget's theories hold. Not only are intellectual processes
themselves constructive but are themselves products of continued
construction. It can be said that the construction and subsequent
elaboration of new understandings is stimulated when established
structures of interpretation do not permit or accept a new situation or
idea. This clash (not understanding) produces a disequilibrium that lead to
mental activity and the modification of previously held ideas to account for
the new experience (Simon & Schifter, 1991).

Hiebert and Carpenter (1992) propose a framework for considering

understanding from the constructivist
perspective which would shed light on analyzing a "range of issues related
to understanding mathematics." They make a
distinction between the external and internal representation of
mathematical ideas, pointing out that, to think and
communicate mathematical ideas, people need to represent them in some
way. Communication requires that the representations be external, taking
the form of spoken language, written symbols, drawings or concrete
objects.
Mathematical ideas becomes tangible when people can express them. By
learning to express their ideas to one another,
students can begin to appreciate the nuance of meaning that natural
language often masks, but that the precise language
of mathematics attempts to distinguish (Lo, Wheatley, & Smith, 1994;
Silver, Kilpatrick & Schlesinger, 1990; Lesh,
Post & Behr, 1987).

The Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics of the

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989) point out in the
Standard on Communication that understanding mathematics can be
defined as the ability to represent a mathematical idea in multiple ways
and to make connections among different representations. In order to
think about mathematical ideas these need to be represented internally
but these mental representations are not observable. This has led
cognitive science to consider mental representations as a field of study
(Ashcraft, 1982; Greeno, 1991; Hiebert & Carpenter, 1992) .

Connections between external representations of mathematical ideas can

be constructed by the learner (Hiebert & Carpenter, 1992) between
different fortes of the same idea or between related mathematical ideas.
These connections are often based on relationships of similarity or of
differences. Connection within the same representation are formed by
detecting patterns and regularities.

The relationship between internal representations of ideas constructs a

network of knowledge. Understanding then is the way information is
represented, so that a mathematical idea, procedure or fact is understood
if it is part of an internal network. Networks of mental representations are

developed gradually as new information is connected to the network or

new ties are constructed between previously disconnected information.
Understanding grows as the networks become larger and more organized
and can be limited if connections are weak or do not exist becoming
useless (Hiebert & Carpenter, 1992).

Although the image of adding to existing networks is appealing in its

simplicity, it may turn out that the image is too simple. Studies have
suggested that students in the act of building understanding reveal a
much more chaotic process (Hiebert, Wearne & Taber, 1991). There have
been a number of studies in which the process of learning and
understanding are of central interest: Cobb, Wood, Yackel, Nichols,
Wheatley, Trigatti & Perlwitz (1991); Carpenter, Fennema, Peterson,
Chiang & Loef (1989); Doyle (1988); Baroody, (1985); Hiebert & Wearne
(1988).

Children are natural learners and the environment both social and physical
offers them many opportunities to acquire notions of quantity. Even in very
poor or diverse cultures, races or classes, children have the opportunity to
acquire quantitative notions (Gelman 1980; Ginsburg, Posner &
Russel1,1981; Ginsburg & Russell, 1981).

Each healthy human brain, no matter the age, sex, race or culture, comes
equipped with a set of unique features: the ability to detect patterns and
to make approximations, a capacity for various types of memory, the
ability to self-correct and learn from experience and external data and self
reflection, and an great capacity to create (Came & Caine 1994). Because
of this predisposition of the brain, children and adults constantly search for
ways to make sense and make connections. This can be translated into a
search for common patterns and relationships as Hiebert and Carpenter
(1992) propose.

Caine and Caine (1994) argue that brain research confirms that multiple
complex and concrete experiences are essential for meaningful learning
and teaching. They add that the brain is designed as a "pattern detector"
and that the function of educators should be to provide students with the
kind of experiences that enable them to perceive "the patterns that
connect."

Children from a very young age are sensitive to quantity. They perceive
differences in number; they see correlation among different numbers of
events; their actions contain quantity and they use words referring to
basic mathematical events (Gelman, 1980; Ginsburg, 1989). Various
studies (Ginsburg & Baron, 1993; Starkey & Cooper, 1980; Van de Walle &

Watkins, 1993) have pointed out the importance of taking into account
children's informal mathematical connections as building block for formal
mathematics. Ginsburg (1989) suggests that students need to learn that it
is acceptable, "even desirable", for them to connect conventional
arithmetic with their own informal knowledge, intuition and invented
procedures.
In a study by Carpenter, Ansell, Franke, Fennema and Weisbeck (1993),
the results suggest that children can solve a wide range of problems,
including problems involving multiplication and division, much earlier than
is generally presumed. With only a few exceptions, children's strategies
could be characterized as representing or modeling the action or
relationships described in the problem. These researchers conclude that
young children's problem-solving abilities have been seriously
underestimated. They suggest that if from an early age children are
motivated to approach problem solving as an effort to make sense out of
problem situations, they may come to believe that learning and doing
mathematics involves solving problems in a way that always makes sense.

The use of manipulatives in mathematics

For years mathematics educators have advocated using a variety of forms

to represent mathematical ideas for students. Physical three-dimensional
objects are often suggested as especially useful. Despite the intuitive
appeal of using materials, investigations of the effectiveness of the use of
concrete materials have yielded mixed results (Bednarz & Janvier, 1988;
Bughardt, 1992; Evans, 1991; Hestad, 1991; Hiebert, Wearne, & Taber,
1991; Simon, 1991; Thompson,J., 1992).

P. Thompson (1994) suggests that the apparent contradictions in studies

using manipulatives are probably due to aspects of instruction and
students' engagement to which the studies did not attend. Evidently, just
using concrete materials is not enough to guarantee success according to
Baroody (1989). The total instructional environment must be looked into to
understand the effective use of concrete materials. In a project by Wesson
(1992) for grades 1 and 2, which emphasized exploratory activities with
manipulatives, the results suggested that while a much wider range of
content than in standard books or tests was covered, there was no loss of
arithmetic skills.

Children understand when using concrete materials if the materials are

presented in a way that helps them connect with existing networks or
construct relationships that prompt a reorganization of networks. It is

important to consider then, the internal networks that students already

carry with them and the classroom activities that promote construction of
relationships between internal representations (Hiebert et al, 1991).
Manipulatives then can play a role in students' construction of meaningful
ideas. Clements and McMillan (1996) and others suggest they should be
used before formal instruction, such as teaching algorithms. Clements and
McMillan propose that concrete knowledge can be of two type: "sensoryconcrete" which is demonstrated when students use sensory materials to
make sense of an idea; and "integrated concrete" which is built through
learning. Integrated concrete thinking derives its strength from the
combination of many separate ideas in an interconnected structure of
knowledge. When children have this type of interconnected knowledge,
the physical objects, the actions they perform on the objects, and the
abstractions they make are all interrelated in a strong mental structure.

Ross and Kurtz (1993) offers the following suggestions when planning a
lesson involving the use of manipulatives. He suggests that the
mathematics teacher should be certain that:

1. manipulatives have been chosen to support the lesson's objectives;

2. significant plans have been made to orient students to the
manipulatives and corresponding classroom procedures;
3. the lesson involves the active participation of each student;
4. the lesson plan includes procedures for evaluation that reflect an
emphasis on the development of reasoning skills.

Invented strategies and number sense

In the last few years there have been studies about the idea of students'
constructing their own mathematical knowledge rather than receiving it in
finished form from the teacher or a textbook (Carpenter, Ansell, Franke,
Fennema, Weisbeck, 1993; Markovits & Sowder, 1994). A crucial aspect of
students' constructive processes is their inventiveness (Piaget, 1973).
Children continually invent ways of dealing with the world. Many of the
errors they make can be

interpreted as a result of inventions (Ginsburg & Baron, 1993; Peterson,

1991). Similarly, in school mathematics, students rely many times on
invented strategies to solve a variety of problems (Carpenter, Hiebert, &
Moser, 1981; Carraher & Schliemann, 1985; Ginsburg, 1989). Kamii and
Lewis (1993) and Madell (1985) have reported successful work in
programs where children are not taught algorithms, but are encouraged to
invent their own procedures for the basic operations. Treffers (1991)

suggests a similar program in the Netherlands and Baker & Baker (1991)
in Australia.

Various studies have been made in the area of invented strategies. Cook
and Dossey's (1982) findings show that children learn number facts easily
and quickly and recall them better when using a strategy approach than
when using a learned algorithm, drill or practice approach. Browne (1906);
Howe and Ceci (1979); Kouba (1989); Rathmill (1978);
Sowder and Wheeler (1989) have done studies on strategies used for
calculation. Carpenter and Moser (1984) found that children in the United
States ordinarily invent a series of abbreviated and abstract strategies to
solve addition and subtraction problems during their first four years in
school. Romberg and Collis (1987) found that even though some children
are limited by their capacity to handle information, most are able to solve
a variety of problems by inventing strategies that have not been taught.
English (1991) observed that in a study of young children's combinatoric
strategies, a series of six increasingly sophisticated solution strategies
were identified. A significant number of children independently adopted
more efficient procedures as they progressed on the task.

A study by Markovits and Sowder (1994) examined the effect of an

intervention in the instruction of seventh grade students for the purpose of
developing number sense. Instruction was designed to provide diverse
opportunities for exploring numbers, number relationships, and number
operations and to discover rules and invented algorithms. Measures taken
several months later revealed that after instruction students seem more
likely to use strategies that reflected number sense and that this was a
long-term change. Rathmill (1994) suggests that planning for instruction
that promotes the development of children's thinking and reasoning about
mathematics not only helps them make sense of the content they are
studying, but also helps them learn ways of thinking that later will enable
them to make sense of new content. Lampert (1986) proposed that "a
sense-making" atmosphere is necessary and that arithmetic should make
sense in terms of children's own experience. Reynolds'(1993) study
suggests that children's imaging activity is at the heart of their sense
making and problem solving. Silver, Shapiro and Deutsch (1993) found
that students' performance was adversely affected by their dissociation of
sense making from the solution of school mathematics problems and their
difficulty in providing written accounts of their thinking and reasoning.

In the Everybody Counts document from the National Research Council

(1989) the major objective of elementary school mathematics is the
development of "number sense". The Curriculum and Evaluation Standards
for School Mathematics (NCTM 1989) also includes number sense as a
major theme throughout its recommendations. Greeno (1991) interprets
number sense as "a set of capabilities for constructing and reasoning with

mental models." This perspective he argues, provides reasons that support

considering various aspects of number sense as features of students'
general condition of knowing in the area of numbers and quantities, rather
than skills that should be given specific instruction. The term number
sense refers to several important but elusive capabilities according to
Greeno, capabilities including flexible mental computation, numerical
estimation and quantitative judgment. Flexible mental computation
according to Greeno involves recognition of equivalence among objects
that are decomposed and recombined in different ways.

Reys et al. (1991) describe number sense in the following manner:

Number sense refers to an intuitive feeling for numbers
and their various uses and interpretations; an
appreciation for various levels of accuracy when
figuring; the ability to detect arithmetical errors,
and a common-sense approach to using numbers... Above
all, number sense is characterized by a desire to make
sense of numerical situations (pp.3-4)

Sowder and Schappelle (1994) suggest that there are common elements
found in classrooms that help children acquire good number sense:
1.
Sense-making is emphasized in all aspects of mathematical learning
and instruction.

2.
The classroom climate is conducive to sensemaking. open
discussions about mathematics occurs both in small groups and with the
whole class.
3.
Mathematics is viewed as the shared learning of an intellectual
practice. This is more than simply the acquisition of skills and information.
Children learn how to make and defend mathematical conjectures, how to
reason mathematically and what it means to solve a problem.

Mental Computation

Mental computation according to Trafton (1986) refers to nonstandard

algorithms for computing exact answers. It is also referred to as the
process of calculating an exact arithmetic result without the aid of an
external computational or recording aid. (Hope, 1986; Reys, 1986). It is
recognized as both important and useful in everyday living as well as

valuable in promoting and monitoring higher-level mathematical thinking

(Reys et al., 1995). It has been recognized in the Curriculum and
Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989) that increased
attention should be given to mental computation. A National Statement on
Mathematics for Australian Schools (Australian Education Council and the
Curriculum Corporation, 1991) was released in 1991 recommending
substantial change in emphasis among mental, written and calculator
methods of computation and between approximate and exact solutions. A
major objective is to redirect the computational curriculum in schools to
reflect a balance in the emphasis on methods of solution. Before the
Statement, the curriculum was divided as: 75% written computation, 25%
Calculator, Estimation, Mental Computation. With the new statement it
would be 25% for each method of computation.

According to Boulware (1950) mental arithmetic has its origin during the
second quarter of the nineteenth century. The idea of building a broader
foundation of meaning and understanding in arithmetic gave rise to
Mental Arithmetic as it was known in the middle of the nineteenth century
with Warren Colburn (1841) considered as pioneer in the field of mental
arithmetic. Before his time, arithmetic had reached a point of extreme
abstraction according to Boulware. The second half of the century
witnessed the decline in interest and understanding of the purpose of
mental arithmetic. With the coming of more writing paper, cheap pencils,
with the rise of industry and its accompanying needs for persons skilled in
computation, the practical or computational phase of arithmetic took on
importance around the turn of the century. The emphasis in arithmetic at
that time was the teaching of isolated facts, followed by drill upon these
facts. High among the purposes stated for the study of arithmetic many
authors of the time placed speed, memory and accuracy by mechanical
rules. There was an emphasis in arithmetic on drill for perfection and
automatic response at the expense of meaning and understanding. In
1950, a dissertation by Boulware is representative of the quest for the
development of "meaning" in mental computation stirred by Brownwell
(1935), who urged that meaning and seeing sense in what is being learned
should be the central focus of arithmetic instruction. Boulware's
conception of mental computation is as follows: Mental arithmetic deals
with number as a unified, consistent system, and not as an aggregate of
unrelated facts. [It] consists of methods of dealing with numerical
situations whereby a clear concept of the number system may be
conceived and utilized in quantitative thinking. It proceeds to the analysis
of number combinations by processes of meaningful experiences with
concrete numbers, reflective thinking in number situations, seeing
relationships, and discovery of new facts as an outgrowth of known facts
(pp.7-8). In 1960, in an article by Sister Josefina there seems to begin
interest in mental computation and in the 1978 NCTM yearbook on
computational skills there appears an article by Trafton (1978) where the
need for including proficiency with estimation and mental arithmetic as
goals for the study of computation is presented. A good number of studies
and articles about mental computation appeared in the period of the

1980s (e.g. Reys, R.E., 1984, 1985; Reys, B. J., 1985a, 1985b; Madell,
1985; Hope, 1985, 1986, 1987; Reys & Reys, 1986; Langford, 1986;
Markovits and Sowder, 1988; Baroody, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1989 and
others) leading up to the statement of the inclusion of mental computation
as an area where increased attention is needed in school mathematics by
the NCTM (1989). With the increase of studies in cognitive skills and
number sense (e.g.Simon, 1979; Resnick, 1986; Silver, 1987; Schoenfeld,
1987; Greeno, 1980; Sowder, 1988) and more recent studies mentioned in
this chapter, mental computation is suggested to be related to number
sense, needed for computational estimation skills and considered a higher
order thinking skill.

In a study by Reys, Reys and Hope (1993) they argued that the low mental
computation performance reported in this study most likely reflected
students' lack of opportunity to use mental techniques they constructed
based on their own mathematical knowledge. The study of Reys, Reys,
Nohda and Emori (1995) assessed attitude and computational preferences
and mental computation performance of Japanese students in grades 2, 4,
6, and 8. A wide range of performance on mental computation was found
with respect to all types of numbers and operations at each grade level.
The mode of presentation (visual or oral) was found to significantly affect
performance levels, with visual items generally producing higher
performance. The strategies used to do mental computation were limited,
with most subjects using frequently a mental version of a learned
algorithm.

In a study by G.W. Thompson (1991) about the effect of systematic

instruction in mental computation upon fourth grade students' arithmetic,
problem-solving and computation ability, a significant difference favored
the group taught mental computation, with girls improving more than
boys.

According to Markovits and Sowder (1994) it would seem reasonable that

if children were encouraged to explore numbers and relations through
discussions of their own and their peers' invented strategies for mental
computation, their intuitive understanding of numbers and number
relations would be used and strengthened. Okamoto (1993) found that
children's understanding of the whole number system seemed to be a
good predictor of their performance on word problems.
Cross-cultural research has identified a variety of mental computation
strategies generated by students, (e.g. Hope & Sherill, 1987; Markovits &
Sowder, 1988) and the difference in mental computation in an out of
school and in-school context (e.g. Ginsburg, Posner, & Russell, 1981;
Pettito & Ginsburg, 1982). Sribner (1984) points out that individuals

develop invented procedures suited to the particular requirements of their

particular occupations.

In a study on individuals who are highly skilled in mental arithmetic

(Stevens 1993), forty-two different mental strategies were observed.
Efficient, inefficient and unique strategies were identified for each of five
groups (grade 8). Dowker (1992) describes in a study the strategies of 44
academic mathematicians on a set of computational estimation problems
involving multiplication and division of a simple nature. Computational
estimation was defined as making reasonable guesses as to approximate
answers to arithmetic problems, without or before actually doing the
calculation. Observing people's estimation strategies, Dowker suggests,
may provide information not only about estimation itself, but also about
people's more general understanding of mathematical concepts and
relationships. From this perspective Dowker concludes that estimation is
related to number sense. Sowder (1992) who agrees with this position
points out that computational estimation requires a certain facility with
mental computation.

In a study by Beishuizen (1993), he investigated the extent to which an

instructional approach in which students use of the hundreds board
supported their acquisition of mental computation strategies. In the course
of his analysis, he found it necessary to distinguish between two types of
strategies for adding and subtracting quantities expressed as two digit
numerals as follows:

1. 1010 strategy - 49 + 33 -> 40 + 30 -> 9 + 3 = 12

70 + 12 = 82

2. N10 strategy - 49 + 33 -> 49 + 30 -> 79 + 3 = 82

Beishuizen's analysis indicates that N10 strategies are more powerful, but
that many weaker students used only 1010 strategies. The study's
findings also suggest that instruction involving the hundreds board can
have a positive influence on a student's acquisition of N10 strategies.
Fuson and Briars (1990) and others have also identified these strategies.

Hope (1987) points out that because most written computational

algorithms seem to require a different type of reasoning than mental

algorithms, an early emphasis on written algorithms may discourage the

development of the ability to calculate mentally. Lee (1991) recommends
that perhaps it is time to investigate changing our traditional algorithms
for addition and subtraction to left-to-right procedures.

According to Reys et al. (1995) there have been many studies that suggest
the benefit of developing mental computation strategies. Mental
computation has also been highlighted in the Curriculum and Evaluation
Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989).

Mental computation can be viewed from the behaviorist perspective as a

basic skill that can be taught and practiced. But it can also be viewed from
the constructivist view in which the process of inventing the strategy is as
important as using it. In this way it can be considered a higher-order
thinking skill (Reys et al., 1995).

Addition, subtraction and teaching strategies

The Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM

1989) recognizes that addition and subtraction computations remain an
important part of the school mathematics curriculum and recommends
that an emphasis be shifted to understanding of concepts. Siegler (1988)
indicated how important it is for children to have at least one accurate
method of computation. In a study by Engelhardt and Usnick (1991) while
no significant difference between second grade groups using or not using
manipulatives was found, significant differences in the subtraction
algorithm favored those taught addition with manipulatives. Usnick and
Brown (1992) found no significant differences in achievement between the
traditional sequence for teaching double-digit addition, involving
nonregrouping and then regrouping, and the alternative, in which
regrouping was introduced before non-regrouping examples in second
graders.

Ohlsson, Ernst, and Rees (1992) used a computerized model to measure

the relative difficulty of two different methods of subtraction, with either a
conceptual or a procedural representation. The results of the use of the
model suggested that regrouping is more difficult to learn than an
alternative augmented method, particularly in a conceptual
representation, a result that contradicts current practice in American
schools. Dominick's (1991) study with third grade students suggested that
students' confusion with the borrowing algorithm centered around a
misunderstanding of what was being traded. Evans (1991) found that
groups taught with pictorial representations or by rote learned to borrow in

significantly less time than did a group using concrete materials in grades
2 and 3.

Sutton and Urbatch (1991) recommended the use of base-ten blocks,

beans and bean sticks or beans and bean cups to serve as manipulatives
to use for trading games and with the "transition board". (A modified
version of the base ten board). They also emphasized that attempting to
teach addition and subtraction without initially preparing the student with
trading games could be counterproductive and result in lack of
understanding due to lack of preparation. In a study which analyzed
individual children's learning of multidigit addition in small groups in the
second grade, results suggested that rarely did a child spontaneously link
the block trades with written regrouping (Burghardt, 1992). Fuson and
Briars (1990) and P.W. Thompson (1992) found that the base ten blocks
could be a helpful support for children's thinking, but many children do not
seem spontaneously to use their knowledge of blocks to monitor their
written multidigit addition and subtraction. The Fuson and Briars study
suggested that frequent solving of multidigit addition or subtraction
problem accompanied by children's thinking about the blocks and
evaluating their written marks procedure, might be a powerful means to
reduce the occasional trading errors made by children. The study also
suggested that counting methods that use fingers, are not necessarily
crutches that later interfere with more complex tasks.

Fuson and Fuson (1992) found that in all of the groups studied, children
were accurate and fast at counting up for subtraction as at counting on for
addition. This contrasts with the usual finding that subtraction is much
more difficult than addition over the whole range of development of
addition and subtraction solution strategies. Sequence counting on and
counting up according to Fuson and Fuson are abbreviated counting
strategies in which the number words represent the addends and the sum.
In both strategies the counting begins by saying the number word of the
first addend. For example: 7 + 5, a child would say 7 pause 8, 9, 10, 11,
12 (up to five numbers, the last number of the sequence is the answer)
and 12 - 5 would be, 5, pause 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, seven numbers were
counted, which is the answer. Thornton's (1990) study provides evidence
that children who were given an opportunity to learn a counting up
meaning for subtraction as well as counting down (counting back from
minuend), preferred the counting up meaning.

In a series of studies by Bright, Harvey and Wheeler (1985) they defined

an instructional game as a game for which a set of instructional objectives
has been determined. These instructional objectives may be cognitive or
affective and are determined by the persons planning the instruction,
before the game is played by the students who receive the instruction in
it. The results of the studies suggest that:

games can be effective for more than drill and practice and for more than
low level learning of skills and concepts,
games can be used along with other instructional methods to teach higher
level content such as problem solving,
games should probably be used relatively soon before or after instruction
planned by the teacher for the same material,
the use of more challenge, fantasy or curiosity might enhance the
effectiveness of instructional games.

Hestad (1991) found that the use of a card game was effective for third
grade students in introducing new mathematical concepts and maintaining
skills.

In a study by Cobb (1995) the use of the hundreds board by second

graders' in a classroom where instruction was broadly compatible with
recent reform recommendations (NCTM, 1989, 1991) was investigated.
The role played by the use of the hundreds board over a 10-week period in
supporting the conceptual development of four second graders was
studied.

Particular attention was given to the transition from counting on to

counting by tens and ones. The hundreds board

is a ten-by-ten grid from either 0 to 99 or 1 to 100. The results indicated

that the children's' use of the hundreds board did not support the
construction of increasingly sophisticated concepts of ten. However,
children's use of the hundred board did appear to support their ability to
reflect on their mathematical activity once they had made this conceptual
advance. The utility of the hundreds table in teaching computation has
been also recognized by Beishuzen (1993);Hope, Leutzinger, Reys and
Reys (1988); Thornton, Jones and Neal (1995) and Van de Walle and
Watkins (1993) .

Teachers' Pedagogical Beliefs about Mathematics Teaching Learning and

Assessment

We can learn more about how invisible components in the teaching and
learning situation can contribute to or detract from the quality of the

mathematical learning that takes place by focusing on the culture

according to Nickson (1992). It is important, he points out, in exploring the
mathematics classroom from the perspective of the culture, it generates,
to remember that we are concerned with the people in the setting and
what they bring to it. Nickson adds that we must increase our sensitivity to
the importance of their hidden knowledge, beliefs, and values for
mathematics education.

One of the major shifts in thinking in relation to teaching and learning of

mathematics in recent years has been with respect to the adoption of
differing views about the nature of mathematics as a discipline. The view
of mathematics that has informed and historically transfixed most
mathematics curriculum has been, according to Lakatos, (1976) one of
considering that mathematics as consisting of "immutable truths and
unquestionable certainty". Such a view does not take into account how
mathematics changes and grows and is waiting to be discovered (Nickson,
1992). Brown and Cooney (1982) note that the intensity of the teachers'
beliefs is very important in the classroom culture. The traditional
detachment of mathematics content from shared activity and experience,
so that it remains at an abstract and formal level, constructs barriers
around the subject, according to Nickson, that sets it apart from others
areas of social behavior. The message conveyed is that is has to be
accepted unquestioningly and from which no deviation is permitted. The
classroom culture will mirror this unquestioning acceptance. The visibility
and acceptance of what is done or not done in mathematics are factors in
stopping teachers from engaging in activities that they may instinctively
feel are appropriate but might challenge the supposedly inviolable
essence of mathematics as they themselves were taught.

In investigating the relationship between what teachers believe about how

children learn mathematics and how those teachers teach mathematics, A.
Thompson (1992) points out that studies have examined the congruence
between teachers' beliefs and their practice and findings have not been
consistent. Researchers such as Grant (1984) and Shirk (1973) have
reported a high degree of agreement between teachers' professed views
of mathematics teaching and their instructional practice, where as others
have reported sharp contrasts (e.g. Carter, 1992; Cooney, 1988; Shaw,
1989; Thompson, 1984).
It has been argued (Nickson, 1988; Ball, 1993) that bringing teachers into
the arena of research activity can be an important step in increasing their
understanding of research processes and results and their relation to
classroom practice. Each mathematics classroom will vary according to
the actors within it. The unique culture of each classroom is the product of
what teachers bring to it in terms of knowledge, beliefs, and values, and
how these affect the social interactions within that context. The daily
experiences of students in mathematics classes of teachers with positive
attitudes were found to be substantially different from those of students in

classrooms of teachers with negative attitudes in a study by Karp (1991).

Overall, teachers with negative attitudes toward mathematics employed
methods that fostered dependency and provided instruction which was
based on rules and memorization, relied on an algorithmic presentation,
concentrated on correct answers and neglected cognitive thought
processes and mathematical reasoning, whereas teachers with positive
attitudes were found to encourage student initiative and independence.
Swetman (1991) found no significant relationship between teachers'
mathematics anxiety and students' attitude toward mathematics in grades
3 to 6. Attitude toward mathematics however, became more negative as
grade increased in teachers and students.

Teacher influence on student achievement

At the time of a study by Good and Grouws, (1977), comparatively few

studies had included observational measures that detail how the teacher
functions as an independent variable in order to influence student
achievement. Teacher effectiveness (as operationally defined in their
study) appeared to be associated strongly with the following clusters:
student initiated behavior; whole class instruction, general clarity of
instruction, and availability of information as needed, a non-evaluative and
relaxed learning environment which is task focused; higher achievement
expectations; classrooms that are relatively free of major behavioral
disorders. Brophy's (1986) study found that most investigative efforts had
focused on curricular content and students' learning without careful
consideration of teachers' instructional practices. Loef (1991) found that
more successful teachers (in grade 1) represented differences among
addition and subtraction problems on the basis of the action in the
problem and the location of the unknown, and they organized their
knowledge on the basis of the level of the children's understanding of the
problem in context. Hiebert and Carpenter (1992) note that it seems
evident that procedures and concepts should not be taught as isolated bits
of information, but it is less clear what connections are most important or
what kind of instruction is most effective for promoting these connections.

Teachers' influence on class content

Even though some researchers have concluded that textbooks determine

the content addresses in classrooms (Barr, 1988; Barr & Dreeben; 1983)
others provide evidence to challenge that assertion (Freeman .& Porter,
1989; Stodolsky,1989) as Sosniak and Stodolsky (1993) have pointed out.
In mathematics, Barr (1988) found that seven out of nine fourth-grade
teachers used their textbooks by moving lesson by lesson through the
book. In contrast, Freeman and Porter (1989) and Stodolsky (1989) found
most mathematics teachers to be selective in their use of textbook

lessons, problem sets, and topics, although topics not included in the texts
were only occasionally added to the instructional program.
Research suggests that teachers are "gatekeepers" (Thornton, 1991) who
make their own decisions about which parts of a textbook to use and
which ways to use them (Barr & Sadow, 1989) and such decisions may not
necessarily lead according Brophy (1982) to close adherence to the
textbook material.

Sosniak and Stodolsky (1993) found in a study of four fourth-grade

teachers that the influence of textbooks on teachers' thinking and on
instruction was somewhat less than the literature indicates. Their results
suggest that patterns of textbook use and thinking about these materials
were not necessarily consistent across subjects even for a single teacher,
and that the conditions of elementary teachers' work encouraged selective
and variable use of textbook materials.
In a study by Stigler, Fuson, Ham, and Myong (1986), an analysis is made
of addition and subtraction word problems in American and Soviet
elementary mathematics textbooks. The data suggests that American
children entering first grade can solve the simple kinds of addition and
subtraction word problems on which American texts spend so much time.
Another study on text books is one by Ashcraft and Christy (1995) in which
they study the frequency of arithmetic facts in elementary texts. The
study tabulated the frequency with which simple addition and
multiplication facts occur in elementary school arithmetic texts for grades
1-6. The results indicated a "small-facts bias" in both addition and
multiplication. "Large" facts, with operands larger than 5, occurred up to
half as frequently as those with operands in the 2-5 range. As was also
found in an earlier tabulation for grades K-3, facts with operands of 0 and
1 occurred relatively infrequently, except for patterns like 1+2 and 1x3
which had a high frequency. The small facts bias in the presentation of
basic arithmetic, at least to the degree observed, probably works against a
basic pedagogical goal, mastery of simple facts. It may also provide a
partial explanation of the widely reported problem size or problem
difficulty effect, that children's and adults' responses to large basic facts
are both slower and more error prone than their solutions to smaller facts.

In a study by Porter (1989) elementary school mathematics is used as a

context for considering what could be learned from careful descriptions of
classroom content. Teachers log and interviews show that large numbers
of mathematics topics are taught for exposure with no expectation of
student mastery: much of what is taught in one grade is taught in the
next, skills typically receive 10 times the emphasis compared to either
conceptual understanding or application, and depending on school and
teacher assignments, mathematics instruction a student receives may be
doubled or halved. Porter argues that "ultimately teachers must decide

what is best for their students and within the limits of their own
knowledge, time and energy." (p.15)

Teaching practices and their effects

Koehler and Grouws (In Grouws, 1992) have suggested that teachers'
behavior is influenced by their knowledge of: the mathematics content
being taught, how students might learn or understand that particular
content and of the methods of teaching of that particular content. Also
influencing teachers' behaviors are teachers' attitudes and beliefs about
teaching and mathematics.

Bush (1991) in a study about factors related to changes in elementary

student's anxiety found that mathematics anxiety tended to decrease as
teachers in grades 4-6 spent more time in small group instruction, had
more years of experience, and took more post-bachelor's mathematics
courses. According to a study by Tangretti (1994), findings indicated that
the elementary teachers that participated in the study were not
adequately prepared to meet NCTM expectations. Their teaching focus
was found to be an algorithmic approach with emphasis on numeration
and computation. Lack of confidence in content areas beyond arithmetic
were reported as contributing to the lack of preparedness of elementary
teachers to implement innovative curriculum. Wood, Cobb and Yackel
(1991) report that after participating in a study, changes occurred in a
teacher's (second grade) beliefs about the nature of mathematics (from
rules and procedures to meaningful activity), about learning (from
passivity to interacting) and about teaching (from transmitting information
to guiding students' development of knowledge). A similar result was
reported in a study by Zilliox (1991). In-service elementary school
teachers felt they were teaching more and better mathematics lessons,
were more comfortable with student use of hands-on materials and with
managing small groups, and had a different sense of student capabilities
and different expectations for student behavior after participating in the
study.

A study by Carpenter, Fennema, Peterson, Chiang, and Loef (1989)

investigated teachers' use of knowledge from research on children's
mathematical thinking and how their students' achievement is influenced
as a result. Although instructional practices were not prescribed, the
teachers that participated in the treatment activities taught problem
solving significantly more and number facts significantly less than did
control teachers. Treatment teachers encouraged students to use a variety
of problem-solving strategies, and they listened to processes their
students used significantly more than did the control group teachers and
knew more about individual students problem-solving processes.

Teachers and assessment issues

A view of learners as passive absorbers of facts, skills, and algorithms

provided by teachers is a basis for much of the most current use of
measures (Stenmark, 1991). Standard achievement tests according to
Kamii and Lewis (1991) measure students' abilities to recall and apply
facts and routines presented during instruction. Some items require only
the memorization of detail; other items, although designed to assess
higher-level learning outcomes, often require little more than the ability to
recall a formula and to make the appropriate substitutions to get the
answer (Lambdin, 1993). Test items of this type are consistent with the
view of learning as a passive, receptive process, a process which is
additive and incremental. The

practice of scoring answers to items of this type (right or wrong) is

consistent with the view that "bits" of knowledge or skills are either
present or absent in the learner at the time of testing. Under this
approach, diagnosis is simply a matter of identifying the missing pieces of
knowledge in the student,thereby creating a need for remedial teaching.
In the constructivist view of teaching, the student is a participant in
building his own understanding. The learner does not absorb new ideas
and data but rather constructs his own version and relates it to existing
information (Wilson, 1992). In order to help the student construct firm
connections in the sense of the constructivist theory, the teacher can
contribute by facilitating time for auto-evaluating, reflection on processes
and ideas, auto-monitoring procedures like journals, portfolios, rechecking
work (Sanford, 1993; Stenmark, 1989, 1991; NCTM, 1995). These are all
metacognitive processes that can be strengthened through these
practices. Metacognition refers to one's knowledge of one's own cognitive
processes and products, and of the cognition of others. It also refers to
self-monitoring, regulation and evaluation of the cognitive activity (Silver
& Marshall, 1990). According to Beyer (1988), metacognition involves
thinking about how one thinks as well as thinking to make meaning. For
assessment and monitoring of student learning, an implication of the
constructivist view is that teachers must measure understanding and
models that individual students construct for themselves during the
learning process (Webb & Romberg, 1992) . Accordingly, achievement
could be better defined and measured not in terms of number facts and
procedures that the student can reproduce, but in terms of best estimates
of his or her level of understanding of key concepts and interrelated
underlying principles (Wilson, 1992) .

A survey to investigate teacher awareness of alternative assessment of

students in mathematics of (n=126) public school teachers in primary (K2), elementary (3-5), middle school (6-8) and high school (9-12) showed

that significant differences in awareness of alternative assessment

practices exists among the four levels (Drury, 1994). In another study,
(Watts, 1993) which is a description of the implementation of the
Curriculum Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989) in grades K-3,
it was found that teachers used in their tests, knowledge level items
significantly more frequently than higher level items, and items with
manipulative materials significantly more than items without
manipulatives. Alternative assessment formats were considered
significantly more difficult to use.

In a study on the influence of district standardized testing on mathematics

instruction for grades 3 and 8 (Kolitch, 1993) it was reported that in two
school districts, the curriculum was aligned to test content; in a third
district with an innovative mathematics program, the district test had little
influence on mathematics instruction, but the program was in jeopardy
because of decreasing computation scores. Kamii and Lewis (May 1991)
also report a similar finding of achievement testing in primary
mathematics as perpetuating lower-order thinking. According to an
achievement test, traditional instruction produced results as good as or
better than, a constructivist program in second grade. Such tests were
created within a framework of mathematics which Kamii and Lewis argue
does not measure understanding.

[Pgina Anterior]

[Previous page]