The linear imperative: An inventory and conceptual analysis of students' overuse of linearity

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 311-342

  Van Dooren, Wim ^a   De Bock, Dirk ^b   Janssens, Dirk ^a   Verschaffel, Lieven ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^b Campus Parnas   (Belgium)

Author keywords

All school levels; Mathematical modeling; Problem solving; Ratio, proportion, percent; Review of research

Indexed keywords

EID: 44249113592     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (103)

1. Akatufba, A. H., & Wallace, J. (1999). Mathematical dimensions of students' use of proportional reasoning in high school physics. School Science & Mathematics, 99, 31-41.
2. Anderson, N. H. (1983). Intuitive physics: Understanding and learning of physical relations. In T. J. Tighe & B. E. Shepp (Eds.), Perception, cognition and development: Interactional analyses (pp. 231-265). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Ben-Zeev, T., & Star, J. R. (2001). Spurious correlations in mathematical thinking. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 253-275.
4. Blum, W., Alsina, C., Biembengut, M. S., Bouleau, N., Confrey, J., Galbraith, P., et al. (2002). ICMI Study 14: Applications and modelling in mathematics education - Discussion document. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51, 149-171.
5. Bold, B. (1969). Famous problems of geometry and how to solve them. New York: Dover Publications.
6. Centre de Recherche sur l'Enseignement des Mathématiques. (2002). Des grandeurs aux espaces vectoriels: La linéarité comme fil conducteur [From quantities to vector spaces: Linearity as a general guiding principle]. Nivelles, Belgium: Author.
7. Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Anderson, J. H. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48, 1074-1079.
8. Cramer, K., Post, T., & Currier, S. (1993). Learning and teaching ratio and proportion: Research implications. In D. T. Owens (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: Middle grades mathematics (pp. 159-178). New York: Macmillan.
9. De Block-Docq, C. (1992). Analyse épistémologique comparative de deux enseignements de la géométrie plane vers l'age de douze ans [Epistemological comparative analysis of two approaches to plane geometry on the age of twelve]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Faculté des Sciences, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
10. De Bock, D., Van Dooren, W., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2002). Improper use of linear reasoning: An in-depth study of the nature and the irresistibility of secondary school students' errors. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50, 311-334.
11. De Bock, D., Van Dooren, W., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). The illusion of linearity: From analysis to improvement. New York: Springer.
12. De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., & Janssens, D. (1998). The predominance of the linear model in secondary school students' solutions of word problems involving length and area of similar plane figures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35, 65-83.
13. De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., & Janssens, D. (2002). The effects of different problem presentations and formulations on the illusion of linearity in secondary school students. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4, 65-89.
14. De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., Janssens, D., Van Dooren, W., & Claes K. (2003). Do realistic contexts and graphical representations always have a beneficial impact on students' performance? Negative evidence from a study on modelling non-linear geometry problems. Learning and Instruction, 13, 441-463.
15. DeFranco, T. C., & Curcio, F. R. (1997). A division problem with a remainder embedded across two contexts: Children's solutions in restrictive versus real-world settings. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19(2), 58-72.
16. Ebersbach, M., & Resing, W. C. M. (2006). Reasoning about non-linearity in 6- to 9-year-olds: The role of task presentation. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Kràtká, & N. Stehlíková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 9-16). Prague, Czech Republic: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
17. Ebersbach, M., & Wilkening, F. (2007). Children's intuitive mathematics: The development of knowledge about non-linear growth. Child Development, 78, 296-308.
18. Ebison, M. G. (1993). Newtonian in mind, but Aristotelian at heart. Science and Education, 2, 345-362.
19. Esteley, C., Villarreal, M., & Alagia, H. (2004). Extending linear models to non-linear contexts: An in-depth study about two university students' mathematical productions. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 343-350). Bergen, Norway: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
20. Evans, J. S. B. T. (2003). In two minds: Dual process accounts of reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 454-459.
21. Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
22. Fischbein, E. (1999). Intuitions and schemata in mathematical reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 11-50.
23. Fischbein, E., & Gazit, A. (1984). Does the teaching of probability improve probabilistic intuitions? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 1-24.
24. Fischbein, E., & Schnarch, D. (1997). The evolution with age of probabilistic, intuitively based misconceptions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 96-105.
25. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
26. Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
27. Gagatsis, A., & Kyriakides, L. (2000). Teachers' attitudes towards their pupils' mathematical errors. Educational Research and Evaluation, 6, 24-58.
28. Galilei, G. (1990). Dialogues concerning two new sciences (H. Crew & A. deSalvio, Trans.). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1638)
29. Greer, B. (1987). Understanding of arithmetical operations as models of situations. In J. A. Sloboda & D. Rogers (Eds.), Cognitive processes in mathematics (pp. 60-80). Oxford, United Kingdom: Clarendon.
30. Greer, B. (1993). The mathematical modelling perspective on word problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12, 239-250.
31. Hadjidemetriou, C., & Williams, J. S. (2002a). Children's graphical conceptions. Research in Mathematics Education, 4, 69-87.
32. Hadjidemetriou, C., & Williams, J. S. (2002b). Teachers' pedagogical content knowledge: Graphs, from a cognitivist to a situated perspective. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 57-64). Norwich, United Kingdom: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
33. Hatano, G. (2003). Foreword. In A. J. Baroody & A. Dowker (Eds.), The development of arithmetic concepts and skills (pp. xi-xiii). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Hawkins, A. S., & Kapadia, R. (1984). Children's conceptions of probability - A psychological and pedagogical review. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 349-377.
35. Hinsley, D., Hayes, J., & Simon, H. (1977). From words to equations, meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In M. A. Just & P. A. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension (pp. 89-108). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Kahneman, D. (2002). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgement and choice (Nobel Prize Lecture, December 8). Retrieved December 21, 2007 from http://nobelprize.org/economics/laureates/2002/kahnemann- lecture.pdf
37. Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, United Kingdom: University Press.
38. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgement of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430-454.
39. Kaput, J. J., & West, M. M. (1994). Missing-value proportional reasoning problems: Factors affecting informal reasoning patterns. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 235-287). New York: State University of New York Press.
40. Karplus, R. (1979). Continuous functions: Students' viewpoints. European Journal of Science Education, 1, 397-413.
41. Klahr, D., & Siegler, R. (1978). The representation of children's knowledge. In H. Reese & L. P. Lipsitt (Eds.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 62-116). New York: Academic Press.
42. Konoid, C. (1989). Informal conceptions of probability. Cognition and Instruction, 6, 59-98.
43. Kuchemann, D., & Hoyles, C. (2001). Investigating factors that influence students' mathematical reasoning. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 85-92). Utrecht, The Netherlands: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
44. Lamprianou, I., & Lamprianou, T. A. (2002). The nature of pupils' probabilistic thinking in primary school pupils in Cyprus. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 273-280). Norwich, United Kingdom: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
45. Lamprianou, T. A., & Williams, J. (2002). A developmental scale for assessing probabilistic thinking and the tendency to use a representativeness heuristic. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 9-16). Norwich, United Kingdom: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
46. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. Cambridge, United Kingdom: University Press.
47. Lave, J. (1992). Word problems: A microcosm of theories of learning. In P. Light & G. Butterworth (Eds.), Context and cognition: Ways of learning and knowing (pp. 74-92). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
48. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
49. Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. M. (Eds.) (2003). Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematical problem solving, learning and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Lesh, R., & Lehrer, R. (2003). Models and modeling perspectives on the development of students and teachers. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5, 109-129.
51. Lesh, R., Lester, F. K., & Hjalmarson, M. (2003). A models and modeling perspective on metacognitive functioning in everyday situations where problem solvers develop mathematical constructs. In R. Lesh & H. Doerr (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning and teaching (pp. 383-404). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Lin, F.-L., & Yang, K.-L. (2004). Differentiation of students' reasoning on linear and quadratic geometric number patterns. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 457-464). Bergen, Norway: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
53. Linchevski, L., Olivier, A., Sasman, M. C., & Liebenberg, R. (1998). Moments of conflict and moments of conviction in generalising. In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 215-222). Stellenbosch, South Africa: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
54. Livne, T. (1996). Examination of high school students' difficulties in understanding the change in surface area, volume and surface area/volume with the change in size and/or shape of a body. Unpublished master's thesis, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel (In Hebrew).
55. Markovits, Z., Eylon, B.-S., & Bruckheimer, M. (1986). Functions today and yesterday. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6(2), 18-24, 28.
56. Matz, M. (1982). Towards a process model for high school algebra errors. In D. Sleeman & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 25-50). London: Academic Press.
57. Müller, D. (1979). Perceptual reasoning and proportion. Mathematics Teaching, 87, 20-22.
58. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
59. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
60. Nesher, P. (1996). School stereotype word problems and the open nature of applications. In C. Alsina, J. M. Alvarez, B. Hodgson, C. Laborde, & A. Pérez (Eds.), Selected lectures from the 8th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 335-343). Sevilla, Spain: Doble Cero.
61. Nunes, T., Schliemann, A., & Carraher, D. (1993). Street mathematics and school mathematics. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
62. Orton, J., & Orton, A. (1994). Students' perception and use of pattern and generalization. In J. P. da Ponte & J. F. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 407-414). Lisbon, Portugal: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
63. Outhred, L. N., & Mitchelmore, M. C. (2000). Young children's intuitive understanding of rectangular area measurement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 144-167.
64. Palm, T. (2002). The realism of mathematical school tasks. Features and consequences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Mathematics, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
65. Post, T., Behr, M., & Lesh, R. (1988). Proportionality and the development of pre-algebra understanding. In A. Coxford (Ed.), Algebraic concepts in the curriculum K-12 (1988 Yearbook) (pp. 78-90). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
66. Resnick, L. B., & Singer, J. A. (1993). Protoquantitative origins of ratio reasoning. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Rational numbers: An integration of research (pp. 107-130). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
67. Reusser, K., & Stebler, R. (1997). Every word problem has a solution: The suspension of reality and sense-making in the culture of school mathematics. Learning and Instruction, 7, 309-328.
68. Rogalski, J. (1982). Acquisition de notions relatives à la dimensionalité des mesures spatiales (longueur, surface) [Acquisition of notions relative to the dimensionality of spatial measures (length, area)]. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 3, 343-396.
69. Rouche, N. (1989). Prouver: Amener à l'évidence ou contrôler des implications? [Proving: Bringing back to evidence or verifying the implications?]. In Commission inter-IREM Histoire et Epistémologie des Mathématiques (Ed.), La démonstration dans l'histoire [Demonstration in history] (pp. 8-38). Lyon, France: IREM.
70. Rouche, N. (1992a). Review of the book Why math? Bulletin de la Société de Mathématique de Belgique (Série A), 44, 245-246.
71. Rouche, N. (1992b). Le sens de la mesure [The sense of measurement]. Bruxelles, Belgium: Didier Hatier.
72. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of "well-taught" mathematics courses. Educational Psychologist, 23, 145-166.
73. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1991). On mathematics as sense-making. An informal attack on the unfortunate divorce of formal and informal mathematics. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 311-343). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
74. Shaughnessy, J. M. (1992). Research in probability and statistics: Reflections and directions. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research in mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 465-494). New York: Macmillan.
75. Simon, M. A., & Blume, G. W. (1994). Building and understanding multiplicative relationships: A study of prospective elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 472-494.
76. Singer, J. A., Kohn, A. S., & Resnick, L. B. (1997). Knowing about proportions in different contexts. In T. Nunes & P. Bryant (Eds.), Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective (pp. 115-132). Hove, United Kingdom: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
77. Singer, J. A., & Resnick, L. B. (1992). Representations of proportional relationships: Are children part-part or part-whole reasoners? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23, 132-246.
78. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 3-22.
79. Sophian, C., & Wood, A. (1997). Proportional reasoning in young children: The parts and the whole of it. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 309-317.
80. Spinillo, A. G., & Bryant, P. E. (1991). Children's proportional judgements: The importance of a half. Child Development, 62, 427-440.
81. Spinillo, A. G., & Bryant, P. E. (1999). Proportional reasoning in young children: Part-part comparisons about continuous and discontinuous quantity. Mathematical Cognition, 5, 181-197.
82. Stacey, K. (1989). Finding and using patterns in linear generalising problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 147-164.
83. Strauss, S., & Stavy, R. (1982). U-shaped behavioural growth. New York: Academic Press.
84. Tierney, C., Boyd, C., & Davis, G. (1990). Prospective primary teachers' conceptions of area. In G. Booker, P. Cobb, & T. N. de Mendicuti (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 307-314). Oaxtepex, Mexico: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
85. Tirosh, D., & Stavy, R. (1999a). Intuitive rules: A way to explain and predict students' reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 51-66.
86. Tirosh, D., & Stavy, R. (1999b). Intuitive rules and comparison tasks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 179-194.
87. Truran, J. M. (1994). Examination of a relationship between children's estimation of probabilities and their understanding of proportion. In J. da Ponte & J. F. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 337-344). Lisbon, Portugal: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
88. Usiskin, Z. (2004). The arithmetic operations as mathematical models. In H.-W. Henn & W. Blum (Eds.), ICMI Study 14: Applications and modelling in mathematics education - Pre-conference volume (pp. 279-284). Dortmund, Germany.
89. Van den Brink, J., & Streefland, L. (1979). Young children (6-8) - Ratio and proportion. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 10, 403-420.
90. VanDeyck, B. (2001). Correlatie en regressie: Een lesmodule voorde behandeling van een statistisch probleem in de derde graad van het secundair onderwijs [Correlation and regression: A lesson module for treating a statistical problem in the tertiary grades of secondary education]. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Leuven, Belgium.
91. Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Depaepe, F., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2003). The illusion of linearity: Expanding the evidence towards probabilistic reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53, 113-138.
92. Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Hessels, A., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2005). Not everything is proportional: Effects of age and problem type on propensities for overgeneralization. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 57-86.
93. Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Janssens, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). Pupils' over-reliance on linearity: A scholastic effect? British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 307-322.
94. Van Dooren, W., De Bock, D., Weyers, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2004). Challenging the predictive power of intuitive rules: A replication and extension study on the impact of 'more A-more B' and 'same A-same B.' Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56, 179-207.
95. Van Dooren, W., Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Bock, D. (2006). Modelling for life: Developing adaptive expertise in mathematical modelling from an early age. In L. Verschaffel, F. Dochy, M. Boekaerts, & S. Vosniadou (Eds.), Instructional psychology: Past, present, and future trends (pp. 91-109). Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier.
96. Vergnaud, G. (1983). Multiplicative structures. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 127-174). New York: Academic Press.
97. Verschaffel, L. (2002). Taking the modelling perspective seriously at the elementary school level: Promises and pitfalls. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 64-80). Norwich, United Kingdom: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
98. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modelling of school arithmetic word problems. Learning and Instruction, 4, 273-294.
99. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lisse, The Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
100. Viennot, L. (1979). Le raisonnement spontané en dynamique élémentaire [Spontaneous reasoning in elementary dynamics]. Paris: Hermann.
101. Villarreal, M., Esteley, C., & Alagia, H. (2004). University students' extension of linear models to non-linear situations. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, p. 364). Bergen, Norway: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
102. Weiler, H. G. (1995). Diagnosing and altering three Aristotelian alternative conceptions in dynamics: Microcomputer simulations of scientific models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 271-290.
103. Wyndhamn, J., & Säljö, R. (1997). Word problems and mathematical reasoning: A study of children's mastery of reference and meaning in textual realities. Learning and Instruction, 7, 361-382.