The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Analysis of Elementary Students' Understanding of the Equal Sign by Using Rasch Model

Rasch 모델을 통한 초등학교 학생들의 등호 이해 분석

  • Received : 2015.12.26
  • Accepted : 2016.02.18
  • Published : 2016.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Given the importance of understanding the equal sign in developing early algebraic thinking, this paper investigated how a total of 695 students in grades 2~6 understood the equal sign. The students completed a questionnaire with three types of items (equation structure, equal sign definition, and open equation solving) based on the construct map by four different levels of understanding the equal sign. The questionnaire was analyzed by Rasch model. The results showed that about 80% of the students were at least Level 3 which means a basic relational understanding of the equal sign. However, the success rates varied across grades and it was noticeable that about 70% of the second graders remained at Level 1 or 2 which maintains an operational understanding of the equal sign. The results of item types demonstrated that item difficulty for the advanced relational thinking was the highest and this is the same even for the Level 4 students. This paper is expected to investigate elementary school students' understanding of the equal sign and provide implications of how to deal with the equal sign in the elementary school.

Keywords

References

  1. 강명희 (2010). 양변 연산식에서 문제풀이전략 유형과 학생들의 등호개념 발달 연구: 정답반응은 등호의 관계적 개념을 뜻하는가?. 학습자중심교과교육연구 10(2), 15-33.(Kang, M.H. (2010). Analysis of children's two sides of equivalence problems solving strategies and development of the concept of equality: does a correct response imply the relational concept of equal sign?. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction 10(2). 15-33.)
  2. 강명희 (2011). 비표준 구조 연산식 정답반응 분석을 통한 초등학생들의 등호개념 이해 연구. 열린교육실행연구 14, 17-30.(Kang, M.H. (2011). Study of elementary school students' concept of equal sign through the analysis of their correct responses to nonstandard structure of equivalent equation problems. Open Education 14, 17-30.)
  3. 교육부 (2015). 수학 1-1. 서울: (주)천재교육.(Ministry of Education (2015). Korean national elementary mathematics 1-1. Seoul: Chunjae Education.)
  4. 교육부 (2015). 수학 6-2. 서울: (주)천재교육.(Ministry of Education (2015). Korean national elementary mathematics 6-2. Seoul: Chunjae Education.)
  5. 기정순, 정영옥 (2008). 등호 문맥에 따른 초등학생의 등호 개념 이해와 지도 방법 연구. 학교수학 10(4), 537-555.(Ki, J.S. & Chong, Y.O. (2008). The analysis of elementary school students' understanding of the concept of equality sign in contexts and the effects of its teaching methods. School Mathematics 10(4), 537-555.)
  6. 방정숙, 최지영 (2011). 범자연수와 연산에 관한 수학 교과서 분석: 일반화된 산술로서의 대수 관점을 중심으로. 수학교육 50(1), 41-59.(Pang, J.S. & Choi, J.Y. (2011). An analysis of the whole numbers and their operations in mathematics textbooks: focused on algebra as generalized arithmetic. The Mathematical Education 50(1). 41-59.)
  7. 지은림, 채선희 (2000). Rasch 모형의 이론과 실제. 서울: 교육과학사.(Ji, E.L. & Chae, S.H. (2000). Applying the rasch model. Seoul: Kyoyookbook.)
  8. 하수현, 이광호 (2011). 초등학교 6학년 학생들의 변수개념 이해에 관한 사례 연구. 수학교육 50(2), 213-231.(Ha, S.H, & Lee, G.H. (2011). Case study on the 6th graders' understanding of concepts of variable. The Mathematical Education 50(2). 213-231.)
  9. Blanton, M., Brizuela, B. M., Gardiner, A. M., Sawrey, K., & Newman-Owens, A. (2015). A learning trajectory in 6-year-olds' thinking about generalizing functional relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 46(5), 511-558. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.5.0511
  10. Blanton, M., Levi, L., Crites, T., & Dougherty, B. J. (2011). Developing essential understanding of algebraic thinking in grades 3-5. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  11. Blanton, M., Stephens, A., Knuth, E., Gardiner, A. M., Isler, I., & Kim, J. S. (2015). The development of children's algebraic thinking: The impact of a comprehensive early algebra intervention in third grade. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 46(1), 39-87. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.1.0039
  12. Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
  13. Brizuela, B. M., Blanton, M., Sawrey, K., Newman-Owens, A., & Gardiner, A. M. (2015). Children's use of variables and variable notation to represent their algebraic ideas. Mathematical Thinking and Learning 17, 34-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2015.981939
  14. Byrd, C. E., McNeil, N. M., Chesney, D. L., & Matthews, P. G. (2015). A specific misconception of the equal sign acts as a barrier to children's learning of early algebra. Learning and Individual Differences 38, 61-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.001
  15. Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in the elementary school. Port smouth, NH: Heinemann.
  16. Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., Berman P., & Pligge, M. (2005). Developing algebraic reasoning in the elementary school. In T. Romberg, T. Carpenter, & F. Dremock (Eds.), Understanding mathematics and science matters (pp.81-98). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  17. Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics 12(3), 317-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311062
  18. Li, X, Ding, M, Capraro, M. M, & 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 United States. Cognition and Instruction 26(2), 195-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000801980845
  19. Matthews, P., Rittle-Johnson, B., McEldoon, K., & Taylor, R. (2012). Measure for measure: What combining diverse measures reveals about children's understanding of the equal sign as an indicator of mathematical equality. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 43(3), 316-350. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.43.3.0316
  20. McNeil, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2005). Why don't you change your mind? Knowledge of operational patterns hinders learning and performance on equations. Child Development 76, 883-899. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00884.x
  21. McNeil, N. M., Fyfe, E. R., & Dunwiddie, A. E. (2015). Arithmetic practice can be modified to promote understanding of mathematical equivalence. Journal of Educational Psychology 107(2), 423. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037687
  22. Molina, M. & Ambrose, R. (2008). From an operational to a relational conception of the equal sign: Third graders' developing algebraic thinking. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 30(1), 61-80.
  23. Powell, S. R., & Fuchs, L. S. (2010). Contribution of equal-sign instruction beyond word-problem tutoring for third-grade students with mathematics difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology 102, 381-394. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018447
  24. Rittle-Johnson, B. (2006). Promoting transfer: Effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. Child Development 77, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00852.x
  25. Stephens, A. C., Knuth, E. J., Blanton, M. L., Isler, I., Gardiner, A. M., & Marum, T. (2013). Equation structure and the meaning of the equal sign: The impact of task selection in eliciting elementary students' understandings. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 32(2), 173-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.02.001