Search

Representations are key to mathematical activities and meaning-making processes as they are part of modeling, connecting, communicating, and understanding mathematical ideas and concepts. The current study sought to examine a group of novice algebra learners' interactions with different representations from an onto-semiotic approach. A case study method was employed to understand how different algebraic practices (abstracting, generalizing, justifying, and operating on symbols) and functional thinking types (recursive, covariational, and correspondence) were facilitated through working with multiple representations. Three 6th graders participated in the study by completing 12 algebra tasks and taking part in two interviews. The onto-semiotic approach guided the data analysis process that involved the identification of mathematical objects that emerged in the participating students' mathematical practices. Then, the configuration of objects and semiotic functions established by the students in the functional situations was examined to understand the role of representations in the students' development of algebraic thinking and practices. Findings showed that abstraction is an essential process for generalization. Thinking about far figures facilitated abstraction and generalization through helping students construct non-ostensive concrete/pictorial representations. Verbal representations interacted with all representations and preceded symbolic representations. Working with near figures promoted recursive and covariational thinking while examining the far figures usually resulted in correspondence thinking. Implications for the school curriculum are discussed in the paper.

Little is known about the cognitive effort associated with algebraic activity in the elementary and middle school grades. However, this investigation is significant for sensitizing teachers and researchers to the mental demands of algebra learning. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between algebraic thinking and domain-general cognitive abilities. The sample of the study comprised 591 students from grades 4 to 7. The students' abilities in algebraic thinking were assessed through a test that involved three task categories: generalized arithmetic, functional thinking, and modelling languages. Test batteries were used to assess students' domain-general cognitive abilities in terms of analogical, serial, spatial, and deductive reasoning. The results of structural equation modelling analysis indicated that: (1) analogical reasoning predicts students' abilities only in generalized arithmetic; (2) serial reasoning predicts students' abilities only in generalized arithmetic; (3) spatial reasoning predicts students' abilities in functional thinking and modelling languages; and (4) deductive reasoning predicts students' abilities in all three categories. Differences between students across grades are also discussed.

Self-efficacy in mathematics is related to engagement, persistence, and academic performance. Prior research focused mostly on examining changes to students' self-efficacy across large time intervals (months or years), and paid less attention to changes at the level of lesson sequences. Knowledge of how self-efficacy changes during a sequence of lessons is important as it can help teachers better support students' self-efficacy in their everyday work. In this paper, we expanded previous studies by investigating changes in students' self-efficacy across a sequence of 3-4 lessons when students were learning a new topic in mathematics (n[subscript Students] = 170, n[subscript Time-points] = 596). Nine classes of Norwegian grade 6 (n = 77) and grade 10 students (n = 93) reported their self-efficacy for easy, medium difficulty, and hard tasks. Using multilevel models for change, we found (a) change of students' self-efficacy across lesson sequences, (b) differences in the starting point and change of students' self-efficacy according to perceived task difficulty and grade, (c) more individual variation of self-efficacy starting point and change in association with harder tasks, and (d) students in classes who were taught a new topic in geometry had stronger self-efficacy at the beginning of the first lesson as compared to those who were taught a new topic in algebra (grade 10), and students in classes who were taught a new topic in fractions had steeper growth across the lesson sequence as compared to those who were taught a new topic in measurement (grade 6). Implications for both research and practice on how new mathematics topics are introduced to students are discussed.

This paper describes the difficulties faced by a group of middle school students (13- to 15-year-olds) attempting to translate algebraic statements written in verbal language into symbolic language and vice versa. The data used were drawn from their replies to a written quiz and semi-structured interviews. In the former, students were confronted with a series of algebraic statements and asked to choose the sole translation, of four proposed for each, that was semantically congruent with the original. The results show that most of the errors detected were due to arithmetic issues, especially around the distinction between product and exponent or sum and product in connection with the notions of perimeter and area. As a rule, the error distribution by type varied depending on the type of task involved.

Little is known about the cognitive effort associated with algebraic activity in the elementary and middle school grades. However, this investigation is significant for sensitizing teachers and researchers to the mental demands of algebra learning. In this paper, we focus on the relationship between algebraic thinking and domain-general cognitive abilities. The sample of the study comprised 591 students from grades 4 to 7. The students' abilities in algebraic thinking were assessed through a test that involved three task categories: generalized arithmetic, functional thinking, and modelling languages. Test batteries were used to assess students' domain-general cognitive abilities in terms of analogical, serial, spatial, and deductive reasoning. The results of structural equation modelling analysis indicated that (a) analogical reasoning predicts students' abilities only in generalized arithmetic; (b) serial reasoning predicts students' abilities only in generalized arithmetic; (c) spatial reasoning predicts students' abilities in functional thinking and modelling languages; and (d) deductive reasoning predicts students' abilities in all three categories. Differences between students across grades are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-efficacy in mathematics is related to engagement, persistence, and academic performance. Prior research focused mostly on examining changes to students' self-efficacy across large time intervals (months or years), and paid less attention to changes at the level of lesson sequences. Knowledge of how self-efficacy changes during a sequence of lessons is important as it can help teachers better support students' self-efficacy in their everyday work. In this paper, we expanded previous studies by investigating changes in students' self-efficacy across a sequence of 3–4 lessons when students were learning a new topic in mathematics (nStudents = 170, nTime-points = 596). Nine classes of Norwegian grade 6 (n = 77) and grade 10 students (n = 93) reported their self-efficacy for easy, medium difficulty, and hard tasks. Using multilevel models for change, we found (a) change of students' self-efficacy across lesson sequences, (b) differences in the starting point and change of students' self-efficacy according to perceived task difficulty and grade, (c) more individual variation of self-efficacy starting point and change in association with harder tasks, and (d) students in classes who were taught a new topic in geometry had stronger self-efficacy at the beginning of the first lesson as compared to those who were taught a new topic in algebra (grade 10), and students in classes who were taught a new topic in fractions had steeper growth across the lesson sequence as compared to those who were taught a new topic in measurement (grade 6). Implications for both research and practice on how new mathematics topics are introduced to students are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Students entering sixth grade operate with three different multiplicative concepts that influence their reasoning in many domains important for middle school. For example, students who are operating with the second multiplicative concept (MC2 students) can begin to construct fractions as lengths but do not construct improper fractions as numbers. Students who are operating with the third multiplicative concept (MC3 students) can construct both proper and improper fractions as multiples of unit fractions. This paper is a case study of one seventh grade MC2 student, Milo, who demonstrated the most advanced reasoning of all MC2 students in a large project with 13 MC2 and 9 MC3 students. In working on problems involving fractional relationships between two unknowns, most MC3 students constructed reciprocal reasoning. In contrast, the MC2 students struggled with these problems. Similar to the MC3 students, Milo showed some evidence of reciprocal reasoning, and he used proper fractions as operators on unknowns with a rationale. However, Milo did not construct reciprocal reasoning. We account for his reasoning by showing how he used length meanings for proper fractions and how he coordinated two different two-levels-of-units structures. The study expands the mathematics for MC2 students, showing what learning may be possible for students like Milo, and it suggests a change to the theory of students' multiplicative concepts. Specifically, advanced MC2 students are those who have constructed length meanings for fractions and can coordinate two different two-levels-of-units structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definitions play an important role in mathematics by stipulating objects of interest to mathematicians in order to facilitate theory building. Nevertheless, limited research has examined how mathematicians approach writing definitions or the values of the mathematical community that are upheld through norms related to definition use and writing. Based on interviews with nine algebraists/category theorists, we characterize two mathematical values upheld through definitions: clarity in and for communication and freedom of choice in the use and writing of definitions. Further results highlight the norms and values related to defining that participants do and do not claim to discuss through their instruction, including a clear emphasis on precision and rigor in mathematics but limited attempts to show that definitions are created by people to serve their needs. Implications include a need for providing instructional opportunities for students to engage with more mathematical values in order to better understand what algebraists do. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of the algebraic method for solving word problems is a challenging topic for secondary school students. Students' difficulties are usually associated with extracting the problem's network of relationships between quantities and with formalizing these relationships into algebraic language in a problem model. Both sources can coexist and interact; thus, it is usually not possible to determine which source of difficulty is more relevant. In addition, there are specific errors, such as the error by multiple referents for the unknown, which are directly linked to the wording of the problem text, and in which the same two sources of error coexist. In this work, we present the results of an experiment conducted with 255 secondary school students assessing the effect of two common difficulties on the accuracy of problem models and on the rate of multiple referents for the unknown. The first difficulty is the use of algebraic language in the construction of the problem model; the second is the use of the same expression to designate different quantities within the problem text. We used a 2 × 2 between-between design, with one factor related to the symbolic language (algebraic or arithmetic) in which the problem model is constructed, and the other factor related to the actual language features of the text problem. Our results indicate that overall, the main source of difficulty for students is the use of algebraic language to formalize a problem model, representing a large effect size. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Isomorphism and homomorphism are topics central to abstract algebra, but research on mathematicians' views of these topics, especially with respect to sameness, remains limited. This study examines open response survey data from 197 mathematicians on how sameness could be helpful or harmful when studying isomorphism and homomorphism. Using thematic analysis, we examined whether sameness was viewed as helpful or harmful for isomorphism and homomorphism before examining rationales for those views. Making use of values of the mathematical community, we note that mathematicians saw conceptual and pedagogical benefits to connecting isomorphism and sameness, which connects to leveraging intuition and valuing ways of increasing understanding. Mathematicians' concerns around using sameness largely revolved around the violation of the mathematical community's idealized value of expressing a priori truth via a-contextual justifications. However, these concerns can be addressed through only targeted usage of sameness and explicit discussions around the utility and relevance of sameness. Implications include the importance of considering how interventions proposed by mathematics educators align with or provoke tension between values held by the mathematical community in order to mitigate or lean into those tensions and encourage fruitful dialogue between the mathematics and mathematics education communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, the authors examined a group of related literatures that used the same large-scale nationally representative dataset with algebra achievement as the outcome to explore why results from the same dataset may differ across studies. More specially, the authors synthesized the extant research literature that utilized data from the High School Longitudinal Study of 2009 (HSLS:09) to investigate the student-, teacher-, school-, and parent-level characteristics associated with algebra achievement and whether these relationships were consistent across students' backgrounds (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, socio-economic status, and prior achievement). The authors have summarized the results of 21 studies across 2 outcome variables (ninth- and eleventh-grade algebra achievement) using optimal resource theory as a framework to summarize evidence-based practices for improving student outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Curriculum materials have a substantial influence on mathematics instruction and, consequently, students' learning opportunities. Many curriculum programs provide instructional notes for teachers and tasks for students as a means of accommodating particular student groups, such as those identified for English language learners. The presence of such materials communicates a narrative about the students they seek to accommodate. In particular, this narrative entails what English language learners need to learn mathematics. We examined the curriculum materials in four commercially available curriculum programs to understand the learning opportunities they provide for the target group and their assumed needs inferred from analyzing those opportunities. We found the curriculum materials implied a homogenous view of English language learners as a group who requires mathematical remediation and additional vocabulary practice. The curriculum materials provided a narrow set of learning opportunities, in terms of both mathematics and language, and may reinforce teachers' existing deficit perspectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the collective mathematical reasoning when students and teachers in grades 3, 4, and 5 explore fractions derived from length comparisons, in a task inspired by the El´konin and Davydov curriculum. The analysis showed that the mathematical reasoning was mainly anchored in mathematical properties related to fractional or algebraic thinking. Further analysis showed that these arguments were characterised by interplay between fractional and algebraic thinking except in the conclusion stage. In the conclusion and the evaluative arguments, these two types of thinking appeared to be intertwined. Another result is the discovery of a new type of argument, identifying arguments, which deals with the first step in task solving. Here, the different types of arguments, including the identifying arguments, were not initiated only by the teachers but also by the students. This in a multilingual classroom with a large proportion of students newly arrived. Compared to earlier research, this study offers a more detailed analysis of algebraic and fractional thinking including possible patterns within the collective mathematical reasoning. An implication of this is that algebraic and fractional thinking appear to be more intertwined than previous suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]