“Equal can be unequal sometimes”: Grade 2 students’ conceptions about working with sharing

Lovisa Sumpter; Helena Eriksson; Maria Hedefalk; Peter Markkanen

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.14.4.2623

Authors

Lovisa Sumpter Stockholm University, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9742-8908
Helena Eriksson Stockholm University, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3772-8073
Maria Hedefalk Uppsala University, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0058-7660
Peter Markkanen Stockholm University, Sweden https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9376-7440

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.14.4.2623

Keywords:

collective mathematical reasoning, conceptions, division, primary students, sharing

Abstract

This paper aims to analyse and discuss grade 2 students’ conceptions about working with sharing. The students worked with cases in an education that differed from their regular mathematics classes, working silently with a textbook at their desks. When working with the cases, they worked in pairs, were encouraged to discuss, and then got to present their solutions in front of the whole class. The cases were problems that could have several valid solutions and answers. We interviewed 25 students, ages 8–9 years, and data was analysed using thematic analysis generating five themes. The first theme was about the importance of making sharing fair and that the cases were realistic. The second theme was about solutions being valid. The third theme covered conceptions about the cases as context or as concrete materials versus working in a textbook, which was connected to the fourth theme: discussing and thinking versus being quiet. The fifth theme was about working at your desk versus the whiteboard. The results signal that open problems can alter students’ conceptions about mathematics and challenges when creating spaces for such teaching.

References

Asami-Johansson, Y. (2015). Designing mathematics lessons using Japanese problem solving oriented lesson structure. A Swedish case study. (Licentiate thesis). Linköping: Linköpings universitet.

Ayalon, M., Wilkie, K. J., & Eid, K. H. (2022). Relating students’ emotions during argumentative discourse to their learning of real-life functional situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 110(1), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10121-5

Blomqvist, A., Elamari, U., & Sumpter, L. (2012). Grade 2 and grade 5 students’ conceptions about mathematics and mathematics education. In G.H. Gunnarsdottir, F. Hreinsdottir, G. Palsdottir, M. Hannula, M. Hannula-Sormunen, E. Jablonka, U. Jankvist, A. Ryve, P. Valero & K. Wæge (Eds.), Proceedings of NORMA 11: The sixth Nordic conference on mathematics education (pp. 187–196). Reykjavik.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

Carson, A. S., & Banuazizi, A. (2008). “That's not fair” Similarities and differences in distributive justice reasoning between American and Filipino children. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39(4), 493–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022108318134

Chernyak, N., & Sobel, D. M. (2016). Equal but not always fair: Value‐laden sharing in preschool‐aged children. Social Development, 25(2), 340–351. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12136

Eriksson, H., Hedefalk, M., & Sumpter, L. (2023). The tension between division and fair share. In H. Palmér, C. Björklund, E. Reikerås & J. Elofsson (Eds.), Teaching Mathematics as to be Meaningful – Foregrounding Play and Children’s Perspectives (pp.69–79). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37663-4_6

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.

Hannula, M. S. (2006). Motivation in mathematics: Goals reflected in emotions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 165–178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-9019-8

Hedefalk, M., Eriksson, H., Markkanen, P., & Sumpter, L. (2022). 5-year-olds in between of sharing and division. Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, 39.

Higgings, K. M. (1997). The effect of year-long instruction in mathematical problem solving on middle-school students' attitudes, beliefs, and abilities. The Journal of Experimental Education, 66(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220979709601392

Hofmann, R., & Ruthven, K. (2018). Operational, interpersonal, discussional and ideational dimensions of classroom norms for dialogic practice in school mathematics. British Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 496–514.

Ingram, N. (2015). Students' relationships with mathematics: Affect and identity. In M. Marshman, V. Geiger, & A. Bennison (Eds.), Mathematics education in the margins (Proceedings of the 38th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), (pp. 301–308). MERGA.

Larkin, K., & Jorgensen, R. (2016). ‘I hate maths: why do we need to do maths?’ Using iPad video diaries to investigate attitudes and emotions towards mathematics in year 3 and year 6 students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 925–944. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9621-x

Lee, J. S., & Lee, K. (2019). Affective factors, virtual inter- cultural experiences, and L2 willingness to communicate in in-class, out-of-class, and digital settings. Language Teaching Research, 24(6), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819831408

Liljedahl, P. (2022) Actions speak louder than words: Social persuasion through teaching practice. Twelfth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME12), Bozen-Bolzano, Italy. hal-03745616

Mason, J. (2017). Qualitative researching. Sage.

Mercer, N. & Howe, C. (2012) Explaining the dialogic processes of teaching and learning: The value and potential of sociocultural theory, Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(1), 12–21.

Mergenthaler, E., & Stinson, C.H. (1992). Psychotherapy transcription standards. Psychotherapy Research 2(2), 125–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503309212331332904

Metsämuuronen, J. (2013). Perusopetuksen matematiikan oppimistulosten pitkittäisarviointi vuosina 2005–2012 [Longitudinal evaluation of learning outcomes in mathematics in compulsory education in 2005–2012]. Finnish National Agency for Education. https://karvi.fi/app/uploads/2014/09/OPH-0113.pdf

Mulyono, H., & Saskia, R. (2021). Affective variables contributing to Indonesian EFL students’ willingness to communicate within face-to-face and digital environments. Cogent Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2021.1911282

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

Nyman, M., & Sumpter, L. (2019). The issue of ‘proudliness’: Grade 2 and Grade 5 students’ motivation towards mathematics. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 7(2), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.7.2.331

Pehkonen, E (2001). Lärares och elevers uppfattningar som en dold faktor i matematikundervisningen [Teachers and students’ conceptions as a hidden factor in mathematics education]. In B. Grevholm (Ed.), Matematikdidaktik – Ett nordiskt perspektiv (pp. 230–256). Studentlitteratur

Pehkonen, E., Ahtee, M., Tikkanen, P., & Laine, A. (2011). Pupils’ conceptions on mathematics lessons revealed via their drawings. In Current State of Research on Mathematical Beliefs XVII. Proceedings of the MAVI-17 Conference (pp. 182–191).

Philipp, R. A. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs and affect. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 257–315). Information Age Publishing.

Roesken, B., Hannula, M. S., & Pehkonen, E. (2011). Dimensions of students’ views of themselves as learners of mathematics. ZDM, Mathematics Education 43(4), 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0315-8

Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.-Y. & Lee, Y.-H. (2007) A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 1436–1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20212

Skolverket [Swedish National Agency for Education] (2022). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare: Lgr22.

Slavin, R. E., Lake, C. & Groff, C. (2009) Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis, Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 839–911.

Stipek, D., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998). Can a teacher intervention improve classroom practices and student motivation in mathematics?. The Journal of Experimental Education, 66(4), 319–337.

Sumpter, L., & Hedefalk, M. (2023). När dela lika är olika. [When fair share is not equal] Nordisk Barnehageforskning, 20(2), 110–129. https://doi.org/10.23865/nbf.v20.256

Sumpter, L., & Sollerman, S. (2023). Changes in affect: Patterns in Grade 4 and grade 8 students’ expressed emotional directions. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 54(8), 1598–1613. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2023.2184279

Sumpter, L. (2013). Themes and interplay of beliefs in mathematical reasoning, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(5), 1115–1135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9392-6

Sumpter, L. (2016). Two frameworks for mathematical reasoning at preschool level. In T. Meaney, O. Helenius, M.L. Johansson, T. Lange & A. Wernberg (Eds.), Mathematics Education in the Early Years: Results from the POEM2 Conference, 2014, (pp. 157–169). Springer.

Takeuchi, M. A., Towers, J., & Plosz, J. (2016). Early years students’ relationships with mathematics. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 62(2), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.11575/ajer.v62i2.56197

Wilkins, J. L., & Ma, X. (2003). Modeling change in student attitude toward and beliefs about mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 97(1), 52–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670309596628

Wong, N. Y., Kong, C. K., Lam, C. C., & Wong, K. M. P. (2010). Changing students' conceptions of mathematics through the introduction of variation. Research in Mathematical Education, 14(4), 361–380.