Reunitising hundredths: prototypic and nonprototypic representations

This paper reports on a study in which 29 Year 6 students (selected from the top 30% of 176 Year 6 students) were individually interviewed to explore their ability to reunitise hundredths as tenths (Behr, Harel, Post & Lesh, 1992) when represented by prototypic (PRO) and nonprototypic (NPRO) models. The results showed that 55.2% of the students were able to unitise both models and that reunitising was more successful with the PRO model. The interviews revealed that many of these students had incomplete, fragmented or non-existent structural knowledge of the reunitising process and often relied on syntactic clues to complete the tasks. The implication for teaching is that instruction should not be limited to PRO representations of the part/whole notion of fraction and that the basic structures (equal parts, link between name and number of equal parts) of the part/whole notion needs to be revisited often.

Fractions, reunitisation and the number-line representation

Centre for Mathematics and Science Education, QUT, Brisbane, Australia This paper reports on a study in which Years 6 and 10 students were individually interviewed to determine their ability to unitise and reunitise number lines used to represent mixed numbers and improper fractions. Only 16.7% of the students (all Year 6) were successful on all three tasks and, in general, Year 6 students outperformed Year 8 students. The interviews revealed that the remaining students had incomplete, fragmented or non-existent structural knowledge of mixed numbers and improper fractions, and were unable to unitise or reunitise number lines. The implication for teaching is that instruction should focus on providing students with a variety of fraction representations in order to develop rich and flexible schema for all fraction types (mixed numbers, and proper and improper fractions).

Theories of Mathematics Education : Seeking New Frontiers

This inaugural book in the new series Advances in Mathematics Education is the most up to date, comprehensive and avant garde treatment of Theories of Mathematics Education which use two highly acclaimed ZDM special issues on theories of mathematics education (issue 6/2005 and issue 1/2006), as a point of departure. Historically grounded in the Theories of Mathematics Education (TME group) revived by the book editors at the 29th Annual PME meeting in Melbourne and using the unique style of preface-chapter-commentary, this volume consist of contributions from leading thinkers in mathematics education who have worked on theory building. This book is as much summative and synthetic as well as forward-looking by highlighting theories from psychology, philosophy and social sciences that continue to influence theory building. In addition a significant portion of the book includes newer developments in areas within mathematics education such as complexity theory, neurosciences, modeling, critical theory, feminist theory, social justice theory and networking theories. The 19 parts, 17 prefaces and 23 commentaries synergize the efforts of over 50 contributing authors scattered across the globe that are active in the ongoing work on theory development in mathematics education.

Surveying theories and philosophies of mathematics education

Any theory of thinking or teaching or learning rests on an underlying philosophy of knowledge. Mathematics education is situated at the nexus of two fields of inquiry, namely mathematics and education. However, numerous other disciplines interact with these two fields which compound the complexity of developing theories that define mathematics education. We first address the issue of clarifying a philosophy of mathematics education before attempting to answer whether theories of mathematics education are constructible? In doing so we draw on the foundational writings of Lincoln and Guba (1994), in which they clearly posit that any discipline within education, in our case mathematics education, needs to clarify for itself the following questions: (1) What is reality? Or what is the nature of the world around us? (2) How do we go about knowing the world around us? [the methodological question, which presents possibilities to various disciplines to develop methodological paradigms] and, (3) How can we be certain in the “truth” of what we know? [the epistemological question]

Politicizing mathematics education : has politics gone too far? Or not far enough?

In this chapter we tackle increasingly sensitive questions in mathematics education, those that have polarized the community into distinct schools of thought as well as impacted reform efforts.

Thai students' engagement with cooperative learning in mathematics classrooms

Over the past decade, Thai schools have been encouraged by the Thai Ministry of Education to introduce more student-centred pedagogies such as cooperative learning into their classrooms (Carter, 2006). However, prior research has indicated that the implementation of cooperative learning into Thai schools has been confounded by cultural traditions endemic within Thai schools (Deveney, 2005). The purpose of the study was to investigate how 32 Grade 3 and 32 Grade 4 students enrolled in a Thai school engaged with cooperative learning in mathematics classrooms after they had been taught cooperative learning strategies and skills. These strategies and skills were derived from a conceptual framework that was the outcome of an analysis and synthesis of social learning, behaviourist and socio-cognitive theories found in the research literature. The intervention began with a two week program during which the students were introduced to and engaged in practicing a set of cooperative learning strategies and skills (3 times a week). Then during the next four weeks (3 times a week), these cooperative learning strategies and skills were applied in the contexts of two units of mathematics lessons. A survey of student attitudes with respect to their engagement in cooperative learning was conducted at the conclusion of the six-week intervention. The results from the analysis of the survey data were triangulated with the results derived from the analysis of data from classroom observations and teacher interviews. The analysis of data identified four complementary processes that need to be considered by Thai teachers attempting to implement cooperative learning into their mathematics classrooms. The paper concludes with a set of criteria derived from the results of the study to guide Thai teachers intending to implement cooperative learning strategies and skills in their classrooms.

MATLAB toolboxes : robotics and vision for students and teachers

In this column, Dr. Peter Corke of CSIRO, Australia, gives us a description of MATLAB Toolboxes he has developed. He has been passionately developing tools to enable students and teachers to better understand the theoretical concepts behind classical robotics and computer vision through easy and intuitive simulation and visualization. The results of this labor of love have been packaged as MATLAB Toolboxes: the Robotics Toolbox and the Vision Toolbox. –Daniela Rus, RAS Education Cochair

Students as decoders of graphics in mathematics

This paper reports on students’ ability to decode mathematical graphics. The findings were: (a) some items showed an insignificant improvement over time; (b) success involves identifying critical perceptual elements in the graphic and incorporating these elements into a solution strategy; and (c) the optimal strategy capitalises on how information is encoded in the graphic. Implications include a need for teachers to be proactive in supporting students’ to develop their graphical knowledge and an awareness that knowledge varies substantially across students.

Solving graphics tasks : gender differences in middle-school students

The capacity to solve tasks that contain high concentrations of visual-spatial information, including graphs, maps and diagrams, is becoming increasingly important in educational contexts as well as everyday life. This research examined gender differences in the performance of students solving graphics tasks from the Graphical Languages in Mathematics (GLIM) instrument that included number lines, graphs, maps and diagrams. The participants were 317 Australian students (169 males and 148 females) aged 9 to 12 years. Boys outperformed girls on graphical languages that required the interpretation of information represented on an axis and graphical languages that required movement between two- and three-dimensional representations (generally Map language).