Mind the gap between students and their mathematical textbooks
Abstract
Reading and comprehending mathematics textbooks means understanding the global meaning and for this to occur successful comprehension strategies are required. Drawing on the results of a pilot study with six grade 3 students, a relationship between the students’ reading skills and their mathematical skills appeared. To examine this relationship further eighteen students from grades 1, 4 and 7, with different achievement levels were interviewed in this study. Both in the pilot study and in the current study the interview questions were inspired by the comprehension strategies of prediction, clarification, questioning and summarization from Palincsar and Brown’s reciprocal teaching model. These strategies are connected to Halliday’s Systemic functional linguistics to better understand how the textbook context affects students’ use of comprehension strategies. The results show that all students had developed reading comprehension strategies that were more or less successful, starting already from grade 1. Furthermore, the results of this study highlights that all students, independent of their achievement level or grade, require explicit teaching concerning efficient comprehension strategies to grasp the mathematical content being presented in mathematics textbooks.
References
Aiken, L. R. (1972). Language factors in learning mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 42 (3), 359-385. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543042003359
Askew, M. (2015). Diversity, inclusion and equity in mathematics classrooms: from individual problems to collective possibility. In A. Bishop, H. Tan & T. N. Barkatsas (Eds.), Diversity in mathematics education: towards inclusive practices (pp. 129-145). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05978-5_8
Barton, M.-L. & Heidema, C. (2002). Teaching reading in mathematics (2nd ed.). Mid-continent research for education and learning.
Boesen, J., Helenius, O., Bergqvist, E., Bergqvist, T., Lithner, J. et al. (2014). Developing mathematical competence: from the intended to the enacted curriculum. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33, 72-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.10.001
Brorsson, Å. (2014). Prima Matematik. 1B (2nd ed.). Gleerups.
Brown, A. L. & Day, J. D. (1983). Marcorules for summarizing texts: the development of experiences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(83)80002-4
Bryant, B. R., Bryant, D. P., Kethley, C., Kim, S. A., Pool, C. & Seo, Y. J. (2008). Preventing mathematics difficulties in the primary grades: the critical features of instruction in textbooks as part of the equation. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31 (1), 21-35. https://doi.org/10.2307/30035523
Carter, A. T. & Dean, O. E. (2006). Mathematics intervention for grades 5-11: teaching mathematics, reading, or both? Reading Psychology, 27, 127-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710600640248
Despina, D. & Harikleia, L. (2014). Addition and subtraction word problems in Greek grade A and grade B mathematics textbooks: distribution and children's understanding. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching & Learning, 8, 1-15.
Dowker, A. (2005). Early identification and intervention for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (4), 324-332. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380040801
Falck, P., Picetti, M. & Sundin, K. (2011). Matte direkt. Borgen. 4 A (2nd ed.) Bonnier utbildning.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y. & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. ZPD, 45 (5), 633-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x
Gersten, R., Jordan, N. C. & Flojo, J. R. (2005). Early identification and intervention for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38 (4), 293-304. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380040301
Haggarty, L. & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28 (4), 567-690. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192022000005832
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Oxford University Press.
Hammill, L. (2010). The interplay of text, symbols and graphics in mathematics education. Transformative dialogues: teaching & learning Journal, 3 (3), 1-8.
Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A. (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: examining the" voice" of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 344-369.
Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A. & Otten, S. (2011). Mapping mathematics in classroom discourse. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42, 451-485. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.42.5.0451
Hiebert, J. & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-404). Information Age.
Huber, C. W. (2010). The impact of reciprocal teaching on mathematics problems solving for grade 4 students [PhD thesis]. Central Connecticut State University.
Jellis, R. M. (2008). Primary children's interpretation and use of illustrations in school mathematics textbooks and non routine problems: a school based investigation [PhD thesis]. Durham University.
Jewitt, C. (2005). Technology, literacy and learning: a multimodal approach. Routledge.
Johansson, M. (2006). Teaching mathematics with textbooks - a classroom and curricular perspective [PhD thesis]. Luleå University of Technology.
Kress, G. R. & Leeuwen, T. van (2001). Multimodality: a social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
Korhonen, J., Linnanmäki, K. & Aunio, P. (2012). Language and mathematical performance: a comparison of lower secondary school students with different level of mathematical skills. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56 (3), 333-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2011.599423
Lee, C. (2006). Language for learning mathematics. Open University Press. Lederer, J. M. (2000). Reciprocal teaching of social studies in inclusive elementary classrooms. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33 (1), 91-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221940003300112
Love, K. (2008). Literacy across the school subjects: a multimodal approach. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Multimodal semiotics: Functional Analysis in contexts of education (pp. 173-186). Continuum International Publishing.
Morgan, C. (2006). What does social semiotics have to offer mathematics education research? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 219-245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-5477-x
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P. & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
Möllehed, E. (2001). Problemlösning i matematik - en studie av påverkansfaktorer i årskurserna 4-9 [PhD thesis]. Malmö Lärarhögskola.
Noonan, J. (1990). Readability problems presented by mathematics text. Early child development and care, 54, 57-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443900540104
Palincsar, A S. (2003). Collaborative approaches to comprehension instruction. In A. Sweet & C. E., Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 99-114). The Guilford Press.
Palincsar, A. S. & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1 (2), 117-175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1
Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds), Handbook of reading research (pp. 545-560). Erlbaum.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. What research has to say about reading instruction, 3, 291-308. https://doi.org/10.1598/0872071774.13
Quirk, P. J. (2010). Using reciprocal teaching and learning methods to enhance comprehension in mathematics word problems [PhD thesis]. Massey University.
Riccomini, P. J., Smith, G. W., Hughes, E. M. & Fries, K. M. (2015). The language of mathematics: the importance of teaching and learning mathematical vocabulary. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31 (3), 235-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030995
Ross, R. S. (2002). Place value: problem solving and written assessment. Teaching Children Mathematics, 8 (7), 419-423. https://doi.org/10.5951/TCM.8.7.0419
Segerby, C. (2014). Comprehension strategies in mathematics: a Swedish example. In S. Pope (Ed.), Proceeding at BSLRM conference in Nottingham (pp. 311-318). British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.
Segerby C. (2018). Vilka lässtrategier beskriver elever i årskurs 1, 4 och 7 att de använder när de tar sig an texter i matematiken? [Degree project in Special Needs in Mathematics]. Malmö University. muep.mau.se/handle/2043/25060
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529682571
Shepherd, M D., Selden, A. & Selden, J. (2012). University students' reading of their first-year mathematics textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 14 (3), 226-256. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2012.682959
Skolverket (2019). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011: reviderad 2019. Skolverket.
Sullivan, P. & Lilburn, P. (2002). Good questions for math teaching: why ask them and what to ask, K-6. Math Solutions Publications.
Sweet, A. P. & Snow, C. (2002). Reconceptualizing reading comprehension. In C. C. Block, L. Gambrell & M. Pressley (Eds.), Improving comprehension instruction: rethinking research theory a, and classroom practice (pp. 17-53). Jossey-Bass.
Thomson, S. & Fleming, N. (2004). Summing it up: mathematics achievement in Australian schools in TIMSS 2002. Australian Council for Educational Research.
Undvall, L., Johnson, K. & Welén, C. (2011). Matematikboken X. Liber.
Vellutino, F. R. (2003). Individual differences as sources of variability in reading comprehension in elementary school children. In A. P. Sweet & C. E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp.51-81). Guilford Press.
Vilenius-Tuohimaa, P. M., Aunola, K. & Nurmi, J.-E. (2008). The association between mathematical word problems and reading comprehension. Educational Psychology, 28 (4), 409-426. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410701708228
Weinberg, A., Wiesner, E., Benesh, B. & Boester, T. (2012). Undergraduate students' self-reported use of mathematics textbooks. Primus, 22 (2), 152-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2010.509336
Westlund, B. (2009). Att undervisa i läsförståelse: lässtrategier och studieteknik för de första skolåren. Natur och Kultur.
Yang, K.-L. & Lin, F.-L. (2012). Effects of reading-oriented tasks on students' reading comprehension of geometry proof. Mathematics Educational Research Journal, 24, 215-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-012-0039-2
Österholm, M. (2006). Kognitiva och metakognitiva perspektiv på läsförståelsen inom matematik [PhD thesis]. Linköping University.
Österholm, M. (2007). A reading comprehension perspective on problem solving. In C. Bergsten & B. Grevholm (Eds.), Developing and researching quality in mathematics teaching and learning. Proceedings of MADIF 5 (pp. 136-145). SMDF.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
