Teaching the substitutive conception of the equals sign

Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 34-49

  Jones, Ian ^a   Inglis, Matthew ^a   Gilmore, Camilla ^a   Evans, Rhys ^a  

^a LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

equals sign; equivalence relations; substitution

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873710168     PISSN: 14794802     EISSN: 17540178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14794802.2012.756635     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. ACME. 2007. Position statement on functional mathematics. London: Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education.
2. Askew, M., Hodgen, J., Hossain, S. and Bretscher, N. 2010. Values and variables: Mathematics education in high-performing countries, London: Nuffield Foundation.
3. Baroody, A.J. and Ginsburg, H.P. 1983. The effects of instruction on children's understanding of the "equals" sign. The Elementary School Journal, 84(2): 199-212. doi:10.1086/461356
4. Behr, M., Erlwanger, S. and Nichols, E. 1976. How children view equality sentences. Report no. PMDC-TR-3, Florida: Florida State University.
5. Capraro, R.M., Capraro, M.M., Yetkiner, Z.E., Özel, S., Kim, H.G. and KüçüK, A.R. 2010. An international comparison of Grade 6 students' understanding of the equal sign. Psychological Reports, 106(1): 49-53. doi:10.2466/pr0.106.1.49-53
6. Carpenter, T.P., Franke, M.L. and Levi, L. 2003. Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in the elementary school, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7. Children, Schools and Families Committee. 2010. From Baker to Balls: The foundations of the education system. House of Commons ninth report of session 2009-10. London: The Stationary Office Ltd.
8. Cobb, P. 1987. An investigation of young children's academic arithmetic contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18(2): 109-24. doi:10.1007/BF00314722
9. Denmark, T., Barco, B. and Voran, J. 1976. Final report: A teaching experiment on equality, Florida: Florida State University.
10. Jones, I. 2008. A diagrammatic view of the equals sign: Arithmetical equivalence as a means, not an end. Research in Mathematics Education, 10(2): 151-65. doi:10.1080/14794800802233688
11. Jones, I., Inglis, M. and Gilmore, C. 2011. Imperative and punctuative operational conceptions of the equals sign. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 31(1): 79-84.
12. Jones, I., Inglis, M., Gilmore, C. and Dowens, M. 2012. Substitution and sameness: Two components of a relational conception of the equals sign. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(1): 166-76. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2012.05.003
13. Jones, I. and Pratt, D. 2012. A substituting meaning for the equals sign in arithmetic notating tasks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43(1): 2-33. doi:10.5951/jresematheduc.43.1.0002
14. Kieran, C. 1981. Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(3): 317-26. doi:10.1007/BF00311062
15. Knuth, E.J., Stephens, A.C., McNeil, N. and Alibali, M.W. 2006. Does understanding the equal sign matter? Evidence from solving equations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(4): 297-312.
16. Li, X., Ding, M., Capraro, M.M. and Capraro, R.M. 2008. Sources of differences in children's understandings of mathematical equality: Comparative analysis of teacher guides and student texts in China and the United States. Cognition and Instruction, 26(2): 195-217. doi:10.1080/07370000801980845
17. McNeil, N. 2004. You'll see what you mean: Students encode equations based on their knowledge of arithmetic. Cognitive Science, 283(3): 451-66.
18. McNeil, N. 2007. U-shaped development in math: 7-year-olds outperform 9-year-olds on equivalence problems. Developmental Psychology, 43(3): 687-95. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.3.687
19. McNeil, N. 2008. Limitations to teaching children 2+2=4: Typical arithmetic problems can hinder learning of mathematical equivalence. Child Development, 79(5): 1524-37. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01203.x
20. McNeil, N. and Alibali, M.W. 2002. "A strong schema can interfere with learning: The case of children's typical addition schema". In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Edited by: Schunn, C. and Gray, W. 661-6. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. McNeil, N. and Alibali, M.W. 2005. Why won't you change your mind? Knowledge of operational patterns hinders learning and performance on equations. Child Development, 76(4): 883-99. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00884.x
22. McNeil, N., Fyfe, E.R., Petersen, L.A., Dunwiddie, A.E. and Brletic-Shipley, H. 2011. Benefits of practicing 4=2+2: Nontraditional problem formats facilitate children's understanding of mathematical equivalence. Child Development, 82(5): 1620-33. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01622.x
23. McNeil, N., Grandau, L., Knuth, E.J., Alibali, M.W., Stephens, A.C., Hattikudur, S. and Krill, D.E. 2006. Middle-school students' understanding of the equal sign: The books they read can't help. Cognition and Instruction, 24(3): 367-85. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2403_3
24. Molina, M., Castro, Encarnación and Castro, Enrique. 2009. Elementary students' understanding of the equal sign in number sentences. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(1): 341-68.
25. Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Foy, P., Olson, J.F., Preuschoff, C., Erberber, E., Arora, A. and Galia, J. 2008. TIMSS 2007 International mathematics report: Findings from IEA's trends in international mathematics and science study at the fourth and eighth grades, Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
26. NCETM. 2009. Mathematics matters: Final report. London: National Centre for Excellence in the Teaching of Mathematics.
27. Nunes, T., Bryant, P. and Watson, A. 2009. Key understandings in mathematics learning, London: The Nuffield Foundation.
28. Ofsted. 2008. Mathematics: Understanding the score. London: Office for Standards in Education.
29. Pirie, S. and Martin, L. 1997. The equation, the whole equation and nothing but the equation! One approach to the teaching of linear equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(2): 159-81. doi:10.1023/A:1003051829991
30. QCA. 2004. Key Stage 2 Mathematics Test B Levels 3-5. http://www.emaths.co.uk/KS2SAT.htm
31. Renwick, E.M. 1932. Children's misconceptions concerning the symbols for mathematical equality. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 2(2): 173-83. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1932.tb02743.x
32. Rittle-Johnson, B. and Alibali, M.W. 1999. Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1): 175-89. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.1.175
33. Rittle-Johnson, B., Matthews, P., Taylor, R.S. and McEldoon, K.L. 2011. Assessing knowledge of mathematical equivalence: A construct-modeling approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1): 85-104. doi:10.1037/a0021334
34. Sáenz-Ludlow, A. and Walgamuth, C. 1998. Third graders' interpretations of equality and the equal symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 35(2): 153-87. doi:10.1023/A:1003086304201
35. Seo, K.H. and Ginsburg, H.P. 2003. "You've got to carefully read the math sentence...": Classroom context and children's interpretations of the equals sign. In The Development of Arithmetic Concepts and Skills: Constructing Adaptive Expertise, Edited by: Baroody, A.J. and Dowker, A. 161-87. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Sherman, J. and Bisanz, J. 2009. Equivalence in symbolic and nonsymbolic contexts: Benefits of solving problems with manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1): 88-100. doi:10.1037/a0013156
37. Wyse, D. and Torrance, H. 2009. The development and consequences of national curriculum assessment for primary education in England. Educational Research, 51(2): 213-28. doi:10.1080/00131880902891479