Abstract or concrete examples in learning mathematics? A replication and elaboration of Kaminski, Sloutsky, and Heckler's study

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 109-126

  De Bock, Dirk ^a,b   Deprez, Johan ^a,b,c   Van Dooren, Wim ^b   Roelens, Michel ^d   Verschaffel, Lieven ^b  

^a HOGESCHOOL UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ANTWERP   (Belgium)

^d Katholieke Hogeschool Limburg   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Algebra; College university; Learning; Research issues; Testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 79953308317     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.42.2.0109     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Abstraete wiskunde leert beter dan praktische voorbeelden [Abstract mathematics is learned better than practical examples]. (2008, April 30). De Standaard.
2. Bills, L., Mason, J., Watson, A., Zaslavsky, O., Goldenberg, P., Rowland, T., et al. (2006). Exemplification: The use of examples in teaching and learning mathematics. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehlíková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 125-154). Prague, Czech Republic: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
3. Chang, K. (2008, April 25). Study suggests math teachers scrap balls and slices. The New York Times. Retrieved August 29,2009, from http://Avww.nytimes. com/2008/04/25/science/25math.html
4. Cutrona, L. J. (2008). "Concrete" examples a fraction too abstract [Letter]. Science, 322, 1632. Retrieved August 29,2009, from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/320/5875/454
5. de Lange, J. (1987). Mathematics, insight and meaning. Teaching, learning and testing of mathematics for the life and social sciences. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Vakgroep Onderzoek Wiskundeonderwijs en Onderwijs Computercentrum, Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht.
6. Deprez, J. (2008). Concreet of abstract? [Concrete or abstract?]. Uitwiskeling, 24(4), 63-69.
7. Deprez, J., De Bock, D., Roelens, M., & Verschaffet, L. (2010). Do abstract examples really have advantages in learning math? In M. M. F. Pinto & T. F. Kawasaki (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 305-312). Brazil, Belo Horizonte: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
8. Fauvel, J., & van Maanen, J. (Eds.). (2000). History in mathematics education. New ICMIstudy series: Vol. 6. History in mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
9. Gick, M., & Holyoak, K. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15,1-38.
10. Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Developing realistic mathematics education. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute.
11. Greeno, J. G., Collins, A. M., & Resnick, L. B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15-46). New York: Macmillan.
12. Greeno, J. G., Smith, D. R., & Moore, J. L. (1993). Transfer of situated learning. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 99-167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
13. Jones, M. G. (2009a). Transfer, abstraction, and context. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40,80-89.
14. Jones, M. G. (2009b). Examining surface features in context. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 94-96.
15. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V M., & Heckler, A. F. (2005). Relevant concreteness and its effects on learning and transfer. In B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, & M. Bucciarelli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1090-1095). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Kaminski, J. A. (2006). The effects of concreteness on learning, transfer, and representation of mathematical concepts. (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 2006). Dissertation Abstracts International, 67,2500A.
17. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V. M., & Heckler, A. F. (2006a). Do children need concrete instantiations to learn an abstract concept? In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 411-416). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V M., & Heckler, A. F. (2006b). Effects of concreteness on representation: An explanation for differential transfer. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1581-1586). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V M., & Heckler, A. F. (2008a). The advantage of abstract examples in learning math. Science, 320,454-455. (Pubitemid 351590651)
20. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V M., & Heckler, A. F. (2008b). Supporting online material for The advantage of abstract examples in learning math. Retrieved May 2, 2008, from http://www.sciencemag. org/cgi/content/full/320/ 5875/454/
21. Kaminski, J. A., Sloutsky, V. M., & Heckler, A. (2009). Transfer of mathematical knowledge: The portability of generic instantiations. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 151-155.
22. Les exemples sont mauvais pour l'apprentissage des mathématiques [Examples are bad for learning math]. (2008, April 25). Le Monde. Retrieved August 29, 2009, from http://www.lemonde.fr/>planete/article/2008/04/25/les- exemples-seraient-des-mauvais-instruments-d-enseignement-desmathematiquesj 038312-3244.html
23. Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 17-20.
24. Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (1996). Problem-solving transfer. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 47-62). New York: Macmillan.
25. McCallum, W. (2008). Commentary on Kaminski et al, The advantage of abstract examples in learning math, Science, April 2008. Retrieved August 29, 2009, from http://math.arizona.edu/∼wmc/Research/Kaminsky-et-al-commentary. pdf
26. McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A "conceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 575-596). New York: Macmillan.
27. Mourrat J.-C. (2008). Testing the limits of "concrete" and "generic" [Letter]. Science, 322, 1632. Retrieved December 17,2008, from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/320/5875/454
28. Podolefsky, N. S., & Finkelstein, N. D. (2009, February). Counterexamples and concerns regarding the use of abstract examples in learning math [Letter]. Retrieved August 29, 2009, from http://www. sciencemag.Org/cgi/ eletters/320/5875/454#l 1970
29. Thorndike, E. L., Cobb, M. V, Orleans, J. S., Symonds, P. M., WaId, E., & Woodyard, E. (1924). The psychology of algebra. New York: Macmillan.
30. Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2002). Student-generated examples in the learning of mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(2), 237-249.
31. Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking (Enlarged ed., M. Wertheimer, Ed.). New York: Harper & Brothers.
32. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27,458-477.