Search

The literature has amply shown that primary and secondary school students have difficulties in understanding rational number size. Many of these difficulties are explained by the natural number bias or the use of other incorrect reasoning such as gap thinking. However, in many studies, these types of reasoning have been inferred from comparing students' accuracies in multiple-choice items. Evidence that supports that these incorrect ways of reasoning are indeed underlying is scarce. In the present work, we carried out interviews with 52 seventh grade students. The objective was to validate the existence of students' incorrect ways of thinking about fraction size that were previously inferred from patterns of correct and incorrect answers to multiple-choice items, by looking at students' verbalizations, and examine whether these ways of thinking are resistant to change. Students' verbalizations support the existence of the different incorrect ways of thinking inferred from previous studies in fraction size. Furthermore, the high levels of confidence in their incorrect reasoning and the fact that they were reluctant to change their answer when they were confronted with other reasoning suggest that these ways of thinking may be resistant to change.

Findings on children's proportional reasoning abilities strongly vary across studies. This might be due to the different contexts that can be used in proportional problems: fair-sharing, mixtures, and probability. A review of the scientific literature suggests that the context of proportional problems may not only impact the difficulty of the problem, but that it also plays an important role in how children approach the problems. In other words, different contexts might elicit different (erroneous) thinking strategies. The aim of the present study was to investigate the role of context in third graders' (n = 305) proportional reasoning abilities. Results showed that children performed significantly better in a fair-sharing context compared to a mixture and a probability context. No evidence was found for a difference in performance on the mixture and the probability context. However, the kind of erroneous answers that were given in the mixture and probability context differed slightly, with more additive answers in the mixture context and more one-dimensional answers in the probability context. These findings suggest that the type of answers elicited by proportional problems might depend on the specific context in which the problem is presented.

The many studies with coin-tossing tasks in literature show that the concept of randomness is challenging for adults as well as children. Systematic errors observed in coin-tossing tasks are often related to the representativeness heuristic, which refers to a mental shortcut that is used to judge randomness by evaluating how well a set of random events represents the typical example for random events we hold in our mind. Representative thinking is explained by our tendency to seek for patterns in our surroundings. In the present study, predictions of coin-tosses of 302 third-graders were explored. Findings suggest that in third grade of elementary school, children make correct as well as different types of erroneous predictions and individual differences exist. Moreover, erroneous predictions that were in line with representative thinking were positively associated with an early spontaneous focus on regularities, which was assessed when they were in second year of preschool. We concluded that previous studies might have underestimated children's reasoning about randomness in coin-tossing contexts and that representative thinking is indeed associated with pattern-based thinking tendencies.

The present study longitudinally investigated proportional reasoning abilities in early elementary school before the start of its instruction. Three aims were put forward: (a) distinguishing the different developmental states in young children's understanding of missing-value proportional situations, (b) investigating how children transition through these states, and (c) exploring possible predictors that explain individual differences in young children's development of proportional reasoning abilities. We longitudinally investigated 5- to 8-year-olds' (n = 315) proportional reasoning abilities in a fair-sharing missing-value proportional reasoning task. First, results showed that the development of proportional reasoning already starts at a very early age and is still ongoing when children are in their third year of elementary school. Second, latent class analysis revealed five different early states of proportional reasoning. The understanding of one-to-many correspondence was identified as an essential stepping-stone toward success in more difficult proportional reasoning problems with many-to-many correspondences. Third, exploratory analyses revealed that the large individual differences in children's development of proportional reasoning abilities were associated with socioeconomic status, language, spatial abilities, and numerical abilities. Theoretical, methodological, and educational implications are discussed.

Several studies have shown that children do not only erroneously use additive reasoning in proportional word problems, but also erroneously use proportional reasoning in additive word problems. Traditionally, these errors were contributed to a lack of calculation and discrimination skills. Recent research evidence puts forward an additional explanation, namely, children's relational preference (i.e., in tasks where both, additive and multiplicative reasoning, are appropriate, some children have a preference for additive relations, while others have a preference for multiplicative relations). Children's relational preference offers a unique explanation for erroneous word-problem solving, after taking into account computation and discrimination skills in 8- to 12-year-olds. However, it is still unclear whether relational preference is also associated with word-problem solving at an earlier age, before the start of formal instruction in word-problem solving. A task measuring children's relational preference as well as three additive and three proportional word problems was administered to a large group (n = 343) of 6- to 7-year-olds. Results show that relational preference is also associated with word-problem solving behavior at this young age: an additive preference is related with better performance on additive word problems but also with more erroneous additive reasoning in proportional word problems. Similarly, a multiplicative preference is related with better performance on proportional word problems but not yet with more erroneous proportional reasoning in additive word problems. The latter is possibly due to the low number of proportional errors that were made in the additive word problems at this young age. The implications of these findings for further research and educational practice are discussed.

Students often show difficulties in understanding rational numbers. Often, these are related to the natural number bias, that is, the tendency to apply the properties of natural numbers to rational number tasks. Although this phenomenon has received a lot of research interest over the last two decades, research on the existence of qualitatively different profiles regarding students' understanding is scarce. The current study investigated the different ways students reasoned in arithmetic operation items with fractions and decimals. A cross-sectional study with 1,262 participants from 5th to 10th grade was performed. A Two Step Cluster Analysis revealed eight different student reasoning profiles. We found that the natural number bias is first overcome in addition and subtraction, and later in multiplication and division. Moreover, differences regarding representation were only found in addition and subtraction items, indicating that natural numbers interfered more strongly in fractions than in decimal numbers. Finally, results showed that some students' difficulties with rational number multiplications and divisions had other explanations than the natural number bias.

Previous research has shown that early numerical abilities are predictive of later mathematical achievement. In line with these previous studies, we investigated whether early numerical abilities are also associated with later probabilistic reasoning abilities. In the present study, we examined children's numerical abilities in the second grade of preschool and their probabilistic reasoning abilities one and two years later. On the one hand, our results indicate that early numerical abilities assessed in the second grade of preschool predict the use of erroneous solving strategies to compare probabilities and create equal probabilities in the third grade of preschool. On the other hand, our results also indicate that the same early numerical abilities predict the use of more advanced or correct strategies when children are in the first grade of primary school. We discuss these seemingly contradicting findings in light of current research on probabilistic reasoning abilities.

We investigated to what extent secondary school students have insight in the apparent motion of the Sun and stars (AMoSS). We used the AMoSS test instrument, which focuses on distinctions between different aspects of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars. It consists of 12 multiple-choice questions accompanied by explanations. We administered the test to students of the fifth year (16-17 years old) of six Belgian secondary schools (N = 410) during a science lesson in school and asked them to explain their choices. We found that, despite instruction, most students only demonstrate a rudimentary understanding of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars for different times during the day, different times during the year, and different locations of the observer. Moreover, we see a clear distinction between the responses to the questions about the Sun and stars. Thanks to the classification system that we developed to categorize the written explanations and a latent class analysis, we are able to identify different mental models that students use to answer questions about the apparent motion of the Sun and stars.

Insight into early precursors of proportional reasoning is necessary to further our theoretical understanding of mathematical development and to guide early interventions. Although several researchers have suggested patterning as a possible precursor for proportional reasoning, there is little empirical evidence to support this assumption, particularly at a young age. To address this gap, the current study explored if patterning in 4- to 5-year-olds (n = 346) is associated with proportional reasoning one and a half years later. Two measures of patterning ability (repeating and growing patterns) and two measures of proportional reasoning (one with discrete quantities and one with a discrete and a continuous quantity) were administered, together with measures addressing general cognitive and numerical abilities. Regression analyses showed that patterning is a unique predictor of proportional reasoning ability over and above sex and general cognitive and numerical abilities. An interaction effect between pattern types and the nature of the quantities was observed: Performance on repeating patterns was uniquely related to performance on proportional reasoning with two discrete quantities, whereas performance on growing patterns was uniquely related to performance on proportional reasoning with a discrete and a continuous quantity. Theoretical implications and suggestions for future studies are discussed.

Although a good rational number understanding is of crucial importance for learners' general maths achievement, many learners have misconceptions about fractions. An often described misconception is that a fraction's numerical magnitude increases when its denominator, numerator, or both increase. The present intervention study investigated how robust this misconception is, after learners have specifically been instructed on the incorrectness of their idea by means of a refutation text, as opposed to a condition where they received an expository text. Results of 76 fourth graders showed a (long-term) learning effect, but no larger learning gains in the group that received a refutation text compared to the group that received an expository text. Results further pointed to large individual differences in the learning gains. While there is a subgroup of learners that benefits from the refutation text, another subgroup was found that tend to overuse and misapply the information given in this text.

Tasks in which learners are asked to compare two data sets using box plots and decide which distribution contains more observations above a given threshold have already been investigated in research. There are indications that these tasks are solved schema-based and that different (correct and erroneous) schemas are used depending on the arrangement of the quartiles around the threshold. Erroneous schemas can cause systematic errors and are often based on typical misconceptions. For example, if learners did not complete the conceptual change and assume that in box plots - like in most other statistical representations (e.g., bar or circle diagrams) - more (box) area also represents more observations, they decide the task according to which box plot shows more box area above the threshold. However, this can lead to incorrect answers, as the box area does not represent frequency but the range of the middle half of the data (interquartile range) and thus a measure of variability. So far, these schema-based reasoning processes have mainly been investigated via differences in solution rates of congruent and incongruent items. The present study investigates whether eye-tracking data can help to better understand which information is processed in the different schemas. Our research interest is based on hypotheses specifying which box plot components are significantly involved in the different schemas. We assume that the gaze patterns of learners using different schemas differ both regarding the number and duration of fixations on the relevant box plot components (areas of interest) and in terms of the number of transitions between them. We asked N = 14 participants to solve congruent and incongruent items and simultaneously collected eye movement data. In the analysis, we first used the solution rates to assign the schemas most likely used. Subsequently, the eye-tracking data were analyzed regarding differences in line with our hypotheses. We found hypothesis-compliant effects in all schemas regarding the number of fixations and transitions, but not regarding fixation duration. These results not only validate the schemas identified in previous studies, but also indicate that the schemas differ primarily in terms of which quartile is focused. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent studies have shown that mathematical vocabulary is an important predictor for mathematical performance in kindergartners, primary school students, and secondary school students (e.g., King & Purpura, 2021; Peng & Lin, 2019; Ünal et al., 2021). However, a recent meta-analysis showed that mathematical vocabulary might be more important in some mathematical domains than in others (Peng et al., 2020). The current manuscript focusses on proportional reasoning, a mathematical subdomain containing a high amount of proportional vocabulary (a subtype of mathematical vocabulary), and consists of two studies. The first study describes the development of an instrument specially created to measure proportional vocabulary, as there was no good instrument available. The results provide indications that the scores on our new proportional vocabulary task are valid and reliable. This instrument was used in a second study to investigate whether second graders' proportional vocabulary is associated with (1) proportional reasoning abilities, and (2) performance on proportional and additive word problems. The results showed that after controlling for gender, age and class, proportional vocabulary uniquely contributed to proportional reasoning abilities and performance on both proportional and additive word problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study cross-sectionally investigated proportional reasoning abilities in 5- to 9-year-old children (n = 185) before they received instruction in proportional reasoning. This study addressed two important aspects of the development of proportional reasoning that remain unclear in the current literature: (1) the age range in which it develops and (2) the influence of the nature of the quantities (discrete or continuous) on children's performance. Three proportional reasoning tasks (i.e., one with two discrete quantities, one with a discrete and a continuous quantity, and one with two continuous quantities) were used. A two-step cluster analysis was conducted on the groups of children based on qualitative differences in understanding. Six different early stages of proportional reasoning were revealed, showing differences in understanding depending on the nature of the quantities involved and which quantity was unknown. The development of proportional reasoning starts at a very early age but it is not yet fully mastered at the age of 9.

Understanding rational numbers is a complex task for primary and secondary school students. Previous research has shown that a possible reason is students' tendency to apply the properties of natural numbers (inappropriately) when they are working with rational numbers (a phenomenon called "natural number bias"). Focusing on rational number comparison tasks, recent research has shown that other incorrect strategies such as "gap thinking" or "reverse bias" can also explain these difficulties. The present study aims to investigate students' different ways of thinking when working on fraction and decimal comparison tasks. The participants were 1,262 primary and secondary school students. A "TwoStep Cluster Analysis" revealed six different student profiles according to their way of thinking. Results showed that while students' reasoning based on the properties of natural numbers decreased along primary and secondary school, almost disappearing at the end of secondary school, students' reasoning based on gap thinking increased along these grades. This result seems to indicate that when students overcome their reliance on natural numbers, they enter a stage of qualitatively different errors before finally reaching the stage of correct understanding.

Previous research demonstrated that some children inappropriately solve multiplicative missing-value word problems additively, while others inappropriately solve additive missing-value word problems multiplicatively. Besides lacking skills, children's preference for additive or multiplicative relations has been shown to contribute to those errors. The present research, using a mixed-method approach, investigated the nature of upper primary school children's relational preference by empirically examining characteristics of intuitions that had been postulated previously. After administering a pre-test, selected children who preferred additive or multiplicative relations further participated in one of two studies using open problems for which both types of relations were appropriate: either a reaction time study (n = 110) in which children's acceptance behavior and reaction times were measured or a semi-structured individual interview study (n = 18) in which their answers, verbalizations, and conviction scores were collected. Results of both studies revealed that relational preference was perseverant and exerted a coercive effect on children's reasoning: Children mostly considered only the preferential type of relation as an appropriate answer in open problems and rejected alternative answers. Furthermore, relational preference appeared as immediate, self-evident, and certain: Children rejected the non-preferential answer more quickly than an irrelevant distractor of comparable size, experienced difficulties in justifying why they gave their preferential answer, and were very convinced of this preferential answer. While this characterization held for both relational preferences, it was especially prominent for the multiplicative one. These results not only have implications for research on and educational practice in multiplicative and additive reasoning but also for the measurement of relational preference.

Word problems are among the most difficult kinds of problems that mathematics learners encounter. Perhaps as a result, they have been the object of a tremendous amount research over the past 50 years. This opening article gives an overview of the research literature on word problem solving, by pointing to a number of major topics, questions, and debates that have dominated the field. After a short introduction, we begin with research that has conceived word problems primarily as problems of comprehension, and we describe the various ways in which this complex comprehension process has been conceived theoretically as well as the empirical evidence supporting different theoretical models. Next we review research that has focused on strategies for actually solving the word problem. Strengths and weaknesses of informal and formal solution strategies--at various levels of learners' mathematical development (i.e., arithmetic, algebra)--are discussed. Fourth, we address research that thinks of word problems as exercises in complex problem solving, requiring the use of cognitive strategies (heuristics) as well as metacognitive (or self-regulatory) strategies. The fifth section concerns the role of graphical representations in word problem solving. The complex and sometimes surprising results of research on representations--both self-made and externally provided ones--are summarized and discussed. As in many other domains of mathematics learning, word problem solving performance has been shown to be significantly associated with a number of general cognitive resources such as working memory capacity and inhibitory skills. Research focusing on the role of these general cognitive resources is reviewed afterwards. The seventh section discusses research that analyzes the complex relationship between (traditional) word problems and (genuine) mathematical modeling tasks. Generally, this research points to the gap between the artificial word problems learners encounter in their mathematics lessons, on the one hand, and the authentic mathematical modeling situations with which they are confronted in real life, on the other hand. Finally, we review research on the impact of three important elements of the teaching/learning environment on the development of learners' word problem solving competence: textbooks, software, and teachers. It is shown how each of these three environmental elements may support or hinder the development of learners' word problem solving competence. With this general overview of international research on the various perspectives on this complex and fascinating kind of mathematical problem, we set the scene for the empirical contributions on word problems that appear in this special issue.

Comparing probabilities is a useful skill in life. Binary choice tasks are popular means in research on probabilistic reasoning. Falk, Yudilevich-Assouline, and Elstein ("Educational Studies in Mathematics," 81(2), 207-233 2012) noted that many of these tasks contain design flaws. We designed and evaluated an extended and improved binary choice item set. In each trial, children were shown two boxes containing desired and undesired elements and had to identify the best box to blindly draw from. We took into account four necessary item set characteristics: (un)desired elements in the correct box, total number of elements in the correct box, and difference between desired and undesired elements in the correct box. Furthermore, some extensions to Falk et al.'s design (2012) were implemented: items in which one box certainly provided a desired element, items with three competing colors of elements, and items with lower "countability" of the elements. Results showed that extensions added to the design did not imperil internal consistency and validity. Younger children were more likely to give correct answers when the correct box contained more desired elements and older children are better at comparing probabilities than younger ones overall.

We report on a study investigating the influence of context, direction of translation, and function type on undergraduate students' ability to translate between graphical and symbolic representations of mathematical relations. Students from an algebra-based and a calculus-based physics course were asked to solve multiple-choice items in which they had to link a graph to an equation or vice versa and explain their answer. The first part of the study focuses on the accuracy of the chosen alternative. Using a generalized estimating of equations (GEE) analysis we find that mathematics items are solved better than physics or kinematics items; that items starting from a graph are solved better than those starting from an equation; and that items on inversely proportional functions are the hardest for students. Quantitatively we see big differences in the number of correct answers between the algebra-based and calculus-based cohorts, but qualitatively the effects of the item variables on the accuracy are the same for both groups. The second part of the study focuses on students' argumentations for the chosen alternative. We observe that students use their physical knowledge 2 to even 3 times as much in kinematics items than in other physics items. When there is an effect of context on argument use, we observe that the use of an argument in a mathematics context differs significantly from the use of that argument in the physics and/or kinematics context. With regard to function type, students explain their choice of answer in items on inversely proportional functions with different arguments and fail more often to answer correctly. In general, the data also show that students from the calculus-based course use more mathematical arguments and score better on the items.

When initially confronted with the Monty Hall dilemma(MHD), people show a very strong tendency to stick withtheir initial choice, although switching maximizes winningchances. Previous research demonstrated that certaininterventions helped participants to discover and apply theoptimal strategy, but generally failed to increase participants’understanding of the MHD solution. An exception on thelatter finding is DiBattista’s (2011) digital learningenvironment study, reporting that the majority of participantswho used the learning environment learned to understand theMHD solution. However, a major shortcoming wasDiBattista’s (2011) methodology, which did not allow to infercausal relations and to conclude which (combination of)manipulation(s) was most important for participants’understanding of the MHD solution. The aim of the presentstudy was to fill this research gap by conducting a controlledrandomized experiment with an analogous digital learningenvironment. Participants were high-school students between16 and 19 years old. The results showed that receivingexplanation about the MHD solution was the most importantmanipulation to improve understanding. Implications foreducation in (posterior) probability are discussed

While previous studies mainly focused on children's additive and multiplicative reasoning abilities, we studied third to sixth graders' "preference" for additive or multiplicative relations. This was investigated by means of schematic problems that were "open" to both types of relations, namely arrow schemes containing three given numbers and a fourth missing one. In study 1, children had to fill out the missing number, while in study 2, children had to indicate all possibly correct answers among a set of given alternatives. Both studies explicitly showed the existence of a preference for additive relations in some children, while others preferred multiplicative relations. Mainly younger children preferred additive relations, whereas mainly children in upper primary education preferred multiplicative relations. Number ratios also impacted children's preference, especially in fifth grade. Moreover, the results of study 2 provided evidence for the strength of children's preference and showed that calculation skills do not coincide with preference, and hence, that preference and calculation skills are two distinct child characteristics. The results of both studies using these open problems resembled previous research results using classical multiplicative or additive word problems. This supports the hypothesis that children's preferred type of relations may be at play in solving classical word problems as well--besides their abilities--and may hence be an additional factor explaining the mistakes that children make in those word problems. This research line thus seems promising for further research as well as educational practice.

The transition from natural to rational numbers is difficult for most elementary school children. A major cause for these difficulties is assumed to be the "conceptual change" they need to undergo in order to see that several natural number properties do not apply to rational numbers. To appropriately handle pupils' difficulties, teachers need well-developed content knowledge (CK) and pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). In the present study, a lesson series to promote pre-service teachers' (PSTs) rational number CK and PCK was developed according to design principles to foster conceptual change. This lesson series was evaluated based on a comparison of the CK and PCK growth of PSTs in the intervention group (n = 138) with the knowledge growth of PSTs in an alternative teacher training course (control group; n = 135). Intervention group PSTs significantly outperformed control group PSTs on CK and PCK, indicating that the intervention was effective in stimulating PSTs' knowledge on rational numbers. Methodological, theoretical as well as practical implications of the present study are discussed.

Previous studies have repeatedly shown that children often incorrectly use an additive model for multiplicative word problems, and a multiplicative model for additive word problems. The present study aimed to investigate which model upper primary school children tend to choose in word problems that are open to "both" ways of reasoning. In particular, a non-symbolic variant of the snake task of Lamon ("Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding: Essential content knowledge and instructional strategies for teachers," Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY, 2008) was administered to 279 children in fifth and sixth grade of primary education. Children were asked to indicate which of two snakes had grown the most, and to verbally explain the reasoning behind their answer. Results revealed that additive reasoning (i.e., absolute growth) was more frequently used than multiplicative reasoning (i.e., relative growth), although it appeared to be harder to verbalize. Second, both trends were more prominent for fifth than sixth graders. Third, contrary to previous studies with younger children, we did not find any differences between answers on discrete and continuous variants of the task. Nevertheless, children's answers were more often explicitly verbalized in discrete than continuous items. Theoretical, methodological, and educational implications for solving word problems, and more generally for modelling in the domain of additive and multiplicative reasoning, are discussed.

When studying a complex research phenomenon, a mixed methods design allows to answer a broader set of research questions and to tap into different aspects of this phenomenon, compared to a monomethod design. This paper reports on how a sequential equal status design (QUAN ? QUAL) was used to examine students' reasoning processes when solving probability problems. A select clustered sampling resulted in the inclusion of 168 high school students in a first, quantitative phase, in which a questionnaire was used to assess how they solved probability problems. This questionnaire included probability items that were based on the outcome orientation, the representativeness misconception, and the equiprobability bias. In a second, qualitative phase, 18 students who were purposefully sampled from the first research phase were interviewed in order to conduct an in-depth study of their probabilistic reasoning processes. In this paper, we illustrate and discuss how several mixed methods research purposes were realized throughout our study: development, expansion, and initiation.