Skip to main content
Log in

Mapping Variation in Children’s Mathematical Reasoning: The Case of ‘What Else Belongs?’

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Explaining appears to dominate primary teachers’ understanding of mathematical reasoning when it is not confused with problem solving. Drawing on previous literature of mathematical reasoning, we generate a view of the critical aspects of reasoning that may assist primary teachers when designing and enacting tasks to elicit and develop mathematical reasoning. The task used in this study of children’s reasoning is a number commonality problem. We analysed written and verbal samples of reasoning gathered from children in grades 3 and 4 from three primary schools in Australia and one elementary school in Canada to map the variation in their reasoning. We found that comparing and contrasting was a critical aspect of forming conjectures when generalising in this context, an action not specified in frameworks for generalising in early algebra. The variance in children’s reasoning elicited through this task also illuminated the difference between explaining and justifying.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akerlind, G. (2005). Phenomenographic methods: A case illustration paradigm. In J. A. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. 103–127). Melbourne, Austalia: RMIT University Press.

  • Bragg, L. & Vale, C. (2014). Teacher noticing of mathematical reasoning. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh & A. Prescott (Eds.) Proceedings of 37th Annual conference of the MERGA (pp. 698–701). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Brodie, K. (2010). Teaching mathematical reasoning in secondary school classrooms. New York, NY: Springer.

  • Brousseau, G. & Gibel, P. (2005). Didactical handling of students’ reasoning processes in problem solving situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 59, 13–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, T. & Franke, M. (2001). Developing algebraic reasoning in the elementary school: Generalisation and proof. In K. Stacey, H. Chick & M. Kendall (Eds.), The future of the teaching and learning of algebra: the 12th ICMI Study (Vol. 8, pp. 155–162).Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

  • Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

  • Cooper, T. & Warren, E. (2008). The effect of different representations on years 3 to 5 students’ ability to generalise. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, D. M., Clarke, D. J. & Sullivan, P. (2012). Reasoning in the Australian Curriculum: Understanding its meaning and using the relevant language. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 17(3), 28–32.

  • Dickerson, D. & Doerr, H. (2014). High school mathematics teachers’ perspectives on the purposes of mathematical proof in school mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(4), 711–733. doi:10.1007/s13394-013-0091-6.

  • Dreyfus, T. (1999). Why Johnny can’t prove (with apologies to Morris Kline). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 85–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (2007a). Connections between generalizing and justifying: Students’ reasoning with linear relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 194–229.

  • Ellis, A. (2007b). A taxonomy for categorizing generalizations: generalizing actions and reflection generalizations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 221–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • English, L. D. (1999). Reasoning by analogy: a fundamental process in children’s mathematical learning. In L. V. Stiff & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Developing mathematical reasoning in grades K-12, 1999 yearbook (pp. 22–36). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuji, T. & Stephens, M. (2001). Fostering understanding of algebraic generalisation through numerical expressions: The role of the quasi-variables. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent & J. Vincent (Eds.), The future of the teaching and learning of algebra: Proceedings of the 12th ICMI study conference (Vol. 1, pp. 258–264). Melbourne: Springer.

  • Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G. (2006). Students’ proof schemes. In P. Boero (Ed.), Theorems in school: from history, epistemology and cognition to classroom practice (pp. 61–72). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

  • Herbert, S., Vale, C., Bragg, L., Loong, E. & Widjaja, W. (2015). A framework for primary teachers’ perceptions of mathematical reasoning. International Journal of Education Research, 74, 26–37.

  • Hunter, J. (2006). Students in a mathematical community of inquiry: What do they think? In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (pp. 301–308). Adelaide, Australia: MERGA.

  • Kaput, J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra. In T. Romberg & E. Fennema (Eds.), Mathematics classroom that promotes understanding (pp. 133–155). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J. & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lannin, J. (2005). Generalization and justification: the challenge of introducing algebraic reasoning through patterning activities. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(3), 231–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lannin, J., Ellis, A. & Elliott, R. (2011). Developing essential understanding of mathematical reasoning for teaching mathematics in prekindergarten—grade 8. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lithner, J. (2008). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lo, M. P. (2012). Variation theory and the improvement of teaching and learning. Goteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

  • Lo, M. P. & Marton, F. (2012). Towards a science of the art of teaching: using variation theory as a guiding principle of pedagogical design. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 1(1), 7–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobato, J., Hohensee, C. & Rhodehamel, B. (2013). Students’ mathematical noticing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(5), 809–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loong, E., Vale, C., Bragg, L. & Herbert, S. (2013). Primary school teachers’ perceptions of mathematical reasoning. In V. Steinle, L. Ball & C. Bardini (Eds.) Proceedings of 36th Annual conference of the MERGA (pp. 466–473). Melbourne: MERGA.

  • Marton, F. (2014). Necessary condition for learning Oxon. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F. & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marton, F., Runesson, U. & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. M. Tsui (Eds.), Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Mason, J. (1998). Enabling teachers to be real teachers: necessary levels of awareness and structure of attention. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1(3), 243–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Barros, R. & Sylva, K. (2012). The relative importance of two different mathematical abilities to mathematical achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 136–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedemonte, P. (2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 23–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radford, L. (2008). Iconicity and contraction: a semiotic investigation of forms of algebraic generalizations of patterns in different contexts. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Runesson, U. (2005). Beyond discourse and interaction. Variation: A critical aspect for teaching and learning mathematics. Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(1), 69–87.

  • Russell, S. (1999). Mathematical reasoning in the elementary grades. In L. Stiff & F. Curcio (Eds.), Developing mathematics reasoning in grades K-12 (pp. 1–12). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Schifter, D. (1999). Reasoning about operations: early algebraic thinking in grades K-6. In L. Stiff & F. Curcio (Eds.), Developing mathematics reasoning in grades K-12 (pp. 62–81). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Small, M. (2011). One, two, infinity. Retrieved from http://www.onetwoinfinity.ca/.

  • Stebbing, L. S. (1952). A modern elementary logic. London, UK: University Publishers.

  • Swan, M. (2011). Improving reasoning: analysing alternative approaches. Retrieved from http://nrich.maths.org/7812/index.

  • Visnovska, J. & Cobb, P. (2009). Learning about building mathematics instruction from students’ reasoning: a professional development study. In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell & T. Burgess (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 547–554). Palmerston North, New Zealand: MERGA.

  • Watson, A. & Mason, J. (2006). Seeing an exercise as a single mathematical object: using variation to structure sense-making. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 91–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widjaja, W. (2014). Year 3/4 children forms of justification. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.) Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the MERGA (pp. 694–697). Adelaide, SA: MERGA.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Colleen Vale.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vale, C., Widjaja, W., Herbert, S. et al. Mapping Variation in Children’s Mathematical Reasoning: The Case of ‘What Else Belongs?’. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 15, 873–894 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9725-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9725-y

Keywords

Navigation