What’s there in an n? Investigating contextual resources in small group discussions concerning an algebraic expression

Elisabeth Rystedt; Cecilia Kilhamn; Ola Helenius

doi:10.7146/nomad.v21i1.148715

Authors

Elisabeth Rystedt
Cecilia Kilhamn
Ola Helenius

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/nomad.v21i1.148715

Abstract

This small-case study combines a content related and a dialogical approach, in an in-depth analysis of how three 12-year-old pupils in a video recorded small group discussion construe the meaning of the letter n in an algebraic expression. The findings indicate that the pupils used a rich variety of contextual resources in their sensemaking attempt. They also tried out a wide range of interpretations of the letter indicating that their conception of an algebraic letter was rich but unstable and that the dialogue was instrumental in helping them move from primitive to more advanced interpretations. In addition to previously known difficulties of understanding letters as variables, we found that the meaning of the communicative convention ”expressed in n” proved an obstacle, and conclude that learning mathematics is as much about learning a specific communicative genre as learning about mathematical objects and relationships.

References

Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematics education in its cultural context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19 (2), 179-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00751231

Boxtel, C. van., Linden, J. van der & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10, 311-330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00002-5

Bush, S. & Karp, K. (2013). Prerequisite algebra skills and associated misconceptions of middle grade students: a review. Journal of Mathematics Behaviour, 32, 613-632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.07.002

Cai, J. & Knuth, E. (Eds.) (2011). Early algebraization: a global dialogue from multiple perspectives. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4

Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64 (1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543064001001

Collis, K. (1975). The development of formal reasoning. University of Newcastle.

Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.). (1999). Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches. Oxford: Elsevier.

Foy, P. & Olson, J. F. (Eds.). (2009). TIMSS 2007 user guide for the international database. Released items. Mathematics - eighth grade. Boston: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. Retrieved from http://timss.bc.edu/timss2007/items.html

Gillies, M. R. (2008). The effects of cooperative learning on junior high school students' behaviours, discourse and learning during a science-based learning activity. School Psychology International, 29 (3), 328-347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034308093673

Gray, E. & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity and flexibility: a "proceptual" view of simple arithmetic. The Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26 (2), 15-141. https://doi.org/10.2307/749505

Hewitt, D. (2012). Young students learning formal algebraic notation and solving linear equations: Are commonly experienced difficulties avoidable? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81, 139-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9394-x

Izsák, A., Çağlayan, G. & Olive, J. (2009). Meta-representation in an algebra I classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18 (4), 549-587. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903191912

Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 317-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311062

Kilhamn, C. (2014). When does a variable vary? Identifying mathematical content knowledge for teaching variables. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 19 (3-4), 83-100.

Kilhamn, C. & Röj-Lindberg, A.-S. (2013). Seeking hidden dimensions of algebra teaching through video analysis. In B. Grevholm (Ed.), Nordic research in didactics of mathematics: past, present and future (pp. 299-326). Oslo: Cappelen Damm.

Kiselman, C. & Mouwitz, L. (2008). Matematiktermer för skolan [Mathematical terms for school]. National Centre for Mathematcs Education, University of Gothenburg.

Küchemann, D. (1978). Children ́s understanding of numerical variables. Mathematics in school, 7 (4), 23-26.

Küchemann, D. (1981). Algebra. In K. Hart. (Ed.), Children's understanding of mathematics: 11-16 (pp. 102-119). London: John Murray.

Lerman, S. (2000). The social turn in mathematics education research. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 19-44). Westport: Ablex. https://doi.org/10.5040/9798400688362.0005

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

Linell, P. (1998). Approaching dialogue: talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.3

Linell, P. (2011). Samtalskulturer: kommunikativa verksamhetstyper i samhället [Conversation cultures: communicative activity types in the society]. Department of Culture and Communication, Linköping University.

MacGregor, M. & Stacey, K. (1997). Students' understanding of algebraic notation: 11-15. Educational Studies in Mathematics 33 (1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002970913563

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.

Phelps, E. & Damon, W. (1989). Problem solving with equals: peer collaboration as a context for learning mathematics and spatial concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81 (4), 639-646. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.4.639

Philipp, R. A. (1992). The many uses of algebraic variables. The mathematics teacher, 85 (7), 557-561. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.85.7.0557

Powell, A., Francisco, J. & Maher, C. (2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners' mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 405-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2003.09.002

Quinlan, C. (2001). Importance of view of regarding algebraic symbols. In H. Chick., K. Stacey., J. Vincent. & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI study conference: the future of the teaching and learning of algebra (Vol. 2, pp. 507-514). University of Melbourne. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11343/35000

Radford, L. (2000). Signs and meanings in students emergent algebraic thinking: a semiotic analysis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 237-268. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017530828058

Ryve, A. (2008). Analyzing mathematical classroom discourse - initiating elaborations on the usefulness of the dialogical approach. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 13 (3), 7-29.

Sfard, A. & Kieran, C. (2001). Cognition as communication: rethinking learning-by-talking through multi-faceted analysis of students' mathematical interactions. Mind, Culture and Activity, 8 (1), 42-76. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327884MCA0801_04

Tall, D. & Thomas, M. (1991). Encouraging versatile thinking in algebra using the computer. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22 (2), 125-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00555720

Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of school algebra and uses of variables. In A. F. Coxford & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), The ideas of algebra, K-12 (pp. 8-19). Reston: NCTM.

Verschaffel, L., Greer, B. & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger B. V.

Webb, M. N. & Mastergeorge, A. (2003). Promoting effective helping behaviour in peer-directed groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 73-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00074-0

Walkerdine, V. (1988). The mastery of reason: cognitive development and production of rationality. London: Routledge.

Yackel E. & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458-477. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.27.4.0458