Norwegian student teachers’ perspectives on linear equations
Abstract
The topic of linear equations is part of school mathematics all over the world. Hence, it is important that teachers are proficient in teaching equations, explaining not only the arithmetic operations in the solving process, but also the objectives of the solution, the nature of an unknown and the balance property of an equation. This study employs a set of 16 low-inference codes to analyse 146 Norwegian student teachers’ explanations of the solution of a linear equation. One important result is that a majority of the students explained additive operations rather by ”swap sides swap signs” than by ”do the same to both sides”.
References
Andrews, P. (2007). Negotiating meaning in cross-national studies of mathematics teaching: kissing frogs to find princes. Comparative Education, 43 (4), 489-509. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050060701611888
Andrews, P. (2020). Swedish primary teacher education students' perspectives on linear equations. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 25 (2), 29-48.
Andrews, P. & Larson, N. (2017). Swedish upper secondary students' perspectives on the typical mathematics lesson. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 10 (3), 109-121. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.10.3.10
Andrews, P. & Larson, N. (2019). The development of a set of low-inference codes for uncovering students' understanding of linear equations: facilitating comparative analysis. In L. Harbison & A. Twohill (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Research in Mathematics Education in Ireland (pp. 35-42). Institute of Education, Dublin City University.
Andrews, P. & Öhman, S. (2017). Don't 'swap the side and swap the sign' , you won't understand what you are doing: Swedish students' perspectives on linear equations. Paper presented at The Eighth Nordic Conference on Mathematics Education, Stockholm University, 30 May - 2 June 2017.
Andrews, P. & Xenofontos, C. (2017). Beginning teachers' perspectives on linear equations: a pilot quantitative comparison of Greek and Cypriot students. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 10 (pp. 1594-1601). Dublin City University and ERME.
Araya, R., Calfucura, P., Jiménez, A., Aguirre, C., Palavicino, M. A., Lacourly, N., Soto-Andrade, J. & Dartnell, P. (2010). The effect of analogies on learning to solve algebraic equations. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5 (3), 216-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2010.486160
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H. & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59 (5), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
Cai, J., Nie, B. & Moyer, J. C. (2010). The teaching of equation solving: approaches in Standards-based and traditional curricula in the United States. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5 (3), 170-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2010.485724
Capraro, M. M. & Joffrion, H. (2006). Algebraic equations: Can middle-school students meaningfully translate from words to mathematical symbols? Reading Psychology, 27 (2-3), 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710600642467
Filloy, E. & Rojano, T. (1989). Solving equations: the transition from arithmetic to algebra. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9 (2), 19-25.
Fram, S. M. (2013). The constant comparative analysis method outside of grounded theory. Qualitative Report, 18 (1) 1-25.
Herscovics, N. & Linchevski, L. (1994). A cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27 (1), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01284528
Hiebert, J. & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural learning: the case of mathematics (pp. 1-28). Erlbaum.
Houang, R. T., Schmidt, W. H. & Cogan, L. (2004). Curriculum and learning gains in mathematics: across country analysis using TIMSS. In C. Papanastasiou (Ed.) Proceedings of the IRC-2004 TIMSS Conference (pp. 224-254). University of Cyprus.
Hurrell, D. P. (2021). Conceptual knowledge OR procedural knowledge OR conceptual knowledge AND procedural knowledge: why the conjunction is important for teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46 (2), 57-71. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2021v46n2.4
Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12 (3), 317-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311062
Knuth, E. J., Alibali, M. W., McNeil, N. M., Weinberg, A. & Stephens, A. C. (2005). Middle school students' understanding of core algebraic concepts: equivalence & variable. ZDM, 37 (1), 68-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655899
Knuth, E. J., Stephens, A. C., McNeil, N. M. & Alibali, M. W. (2006). Does understanding the equal sign matter? Evidence from solving equations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37 (4), 297-312.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1997). It doesn't add up: African American students' mathematics achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (6), 697-708. https://doi.org/10.2307/749638
Larson, N. & Larsson, K. (2021). Differences in Norwegian and Swedish student teachers' explanations of solutions of linear equations. Nordic Journal of STEM Education, 5 (1). [Proceedings from the MNT Conference 2021, University of Agder, Grimstad, Norway, March 15-16, 2021]. https://doi.org/10.5324/njsteme.v5i1.3885
Lima, R. N. de & Tall, D. (2008). Procedural embodiment and magic in linear equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67 (1), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9086-0
Linchevski, L. & Herscovics, N. (1996). Crossing the cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebra: operating on the unknown in the context of equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30 (1), 39-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00163752
MacGregor, M. & Stacey, K. (2007). Students' understanding of algebraic notation: 11-15. In G. C. Leder & H. Forgasz (Eds.), Stepping stones for the 21st century (pp. 63-81). Brill Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087901509_006
Moses, R. P. & Cobb Jr, C. (2001). Organizing algebra: the need to voice a demand. Social Policy, 31 (4), 4-12.
Ngu, B. H., Chung, S. F. & Yeung, A. S. (2015). Cognitive load in algebra: element interactivity in solving equations. Educational Psychology, 35 (3), 271-293. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.878019
Ngu, B. H. & Phan, H. P. (2016a). Comparing balance and inverse methods on learning conceptual and procedural knowledge in equation solving: a cognitive load perspective. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 11 (1), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1554480X.2015.1047836
Ngu, B. H. & Phan, H. P. (2016b). Unpacking the complexity of linear equations from a cognitive load theory perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 28 (1), 95-118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9298-2
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2013). Curriculum for the common core subject of mathematics (MAT1-04). Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training.
Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training. (2020). Curriculum for the common core subject of mathematics (MAT1-05). Norwegian Directorate for Education and Training.
Pirie, S. & 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 (2), 159-181. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003051829991
Rystedt, E., Helenius, O. & Kilhamn, C. (2016). Moving in and out of contexts in collaborative reasoning about equations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 44, 50-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.10.002
Stacey, K. & MacGregor, M. (1997). Students' understanding of algebraic notation: 11-15. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33 (3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002970913563
Star, J. R. & Seifert, C. (2006). The development of flexibility in equation solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31 (3), 280-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.08.001
Stephens, A. C., Knuth, E. J., Blanton, M. L., Isler, I., Gardiner, A. M. & Marum, T. (2013). Equation structure and the meaning of the equal sign: the impact of task selection in eliciting elementary students' understandings. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32 (2), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.02.001
Tall, D. (2017). Long-term effects of sense making and anxiety in algebra. In S. Stewart (Ed.), And the rest is just algebra (pp. 43-62). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45053-7_3
Vlassis, J. (2002). The balance model: hindrance or support for the solving of linear equations with one unknown. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49 (3), 341-359. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020229023965
Wasserman, N. H. (2014). Introducing algebraic structures through solving equations: vertical content knowledge for K-12 mathematics teachers. Primus, 24 (3), 191-214. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2013.857374
Xenofontos, C. & Andrews, P. (2017). Explanations as tools for evaluating content knowledge for teaching: a cross-national pilot study in Cyprus and Greece. In T. Dooley & G. Gueudet (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 10 (pp. 1666-1673). Dublin City University and ERME.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
