skip to main content


Title: A model of students’ conceptions of equivalence.
In mathematics education, much research has focused on studying how students think about the equals sign, but equality is just one example of the larger concept of equivalence, which occurs extensively throughout the K-16 mathematics curriculum. Yet research on how students think about broader notions of equivalence is limited. We present a model of students’ thinking that is informed by Sfard’s theories of the Genesis of Mathematical Objects, in which she distinguishes between operational versus structural thinking (e.g., 1995), which we conceptualize as a continuum rather than a binary categorization. Sfard also describes a pseudostructural conception, in which the objects that a student conceptualizes are not the reification of a process. We combine Sfard’s theory with a categorization of the source of students’ definitions, where stipulated definitions are given a priori and can be explicitly consulted when determining whether something fits the definitions, while extracted definitions are constructed from repeated observation of usage (Edwards & Ward, 2004). We combine these theories with inductive coding of data (open-ended questions, multiple-choice questions, and cognitive interviews) collected from thousands of students enrolled in a range of mathematics classes in college in the US, to generate categories of students’ thinking around equivalence. We see this model as a tool for analysing students’ work to better understand how students conceptualize equivalence. With this model we hope to begin a conversation about how students tend to conceptualize equivalence at various levels, as well as the ways in which equivalence is or is not explicitly addressed currently in curricula and instruction, and what consequences this might have for students’ conceptions of equivalence.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1760491
NSF-PAR ID:
10301259
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ;
Editor(s):
Inprasitha, Maitree; Changsri, Narumon; Boonsena, Nisakorn
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Proceedings of the 44th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education
Volume:
1
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Inprasitha, Maitree ; Changsri, Narumon ; Boonsena, Nisakorn (Ed.)
    Substitution is a key idea that is woven throughout the mathematics curriculum. In secondary school, substitution is described as an interchangeability of equal numbers, and then as a method for finding solutions of systems of equations. In university, substitution is used as a means to recognize familiar structures in Integral Calculus. Despite its prevalence in mathematics, there is little research on substitution, especially on students’ understanding of substitution. This work aims to investigate students’ meanings for substitution, and how they use it. We draw on Tall and Vinner’s (1981) ideas of concept definition and concept image to explore students’ meanings of substitution through their personal definitions of substitution, what they identify as substitution, and how they perform substitution. In this presentation, we report on elementary algebra students’ responses to questions about substitution. Data comes includes written responses to multiple-choice and open-ended questions and transcripts from clinical interviews across multiple semesters at a community college. Through a combination of thematic and conceptual analysis, we categorized students’ thinking about substitution and what features appeared to impact how they enact it. We found that students often identify substitution as a process of replacement of one mathematical object for another but differ in the generality of the mathematical objects that they consider (e.g., strictly as the replacement of a number for a variable versus replacement of any expression for another expression). Students further differed in whether or not they thought that substitution entailed equivalence of the objects being replaced. When performing substitution (e.g., substituting x+1 for y in 2y^2), we found that students’ activity was heavily based on their understanding of the structure of the expression where the substitution is taking place (the unified ‘pieces’ of 2y^2). In addition to other findings, we elaborate on the mental processes that students engage in when performing substitution and synthesize our findings with the notion of substitution equivalence (Wladis et al., 2020). 
    more » « less
  2. Cho, Sung Je (Ed.)
    In this study, we describe a model of student thinking around equivalence (conceptualized as any type of equivalence relation), presenting vignettes from student conceptions from various college courses ranging from developmental to linear algebra. In this model, we conceptualize student definitions along a continuous plane with two-dimensions: the extent to which definitions are extracted vs. stipulated; and the extent to which conceptions of equivalence are operational or structural. We present examples to illustrate how this model may help us to recognize ill-defined or operational thinking on the part of students even when they appear to be able to provide “standard” definitions of equivalence, as well as to highlight cases in which students are providing mathematically valid, if non-standard, definitions of equivalence. We hope that this framework will serve as a useful tool for analyzing student work and exploring instructional and curricular handling of equivalence. 
    more » « less
  3. Karunakaran, S. S. ; & Higgins, A. (Ed.)
    This paper describes a model of student thinking around equivalence (conceptualized as any type of equivalence relation), presenting vignettes from student conceptions from various college courses ranging from developmental to linear algebra, and courses in between (e.g., calculus). In this model, we conceptualize student definitions along a continuous plane with two dimensions: the extent to which definitions are extracted vs. stipulated; and the extent to which conceptions of equivalence are operational or structural. We present examples to illustrate how this model may help us to recognize ill-defined or limited thinking on the part of students even when they appear to be able to provide “standard” definitions of equivalence, as well as to highlight cases in which students are providing mathematically valid, if non-standard, definitions of equivalence. We hope that this framework will serve as a useful tool for analyzing student work, as well as exploring instructional and curricular handling of equivalence. 
    more » « less
  4. In this proposal, we will share some initial findings about how teacher and student engagement in cogenerative dialogues influenced the development of the Culturally Relevant Pedagogical Guidelines for Computational Thinking and Computer Science (CRPG-CSCT). The CRPG-CSCT’s purpose is to provide computer science teachers with tools to enhance their instruction by accurately reflecting students’ diverse cultural resources in the classroom. Additionally, the CRPG-CSCT will provide guidance to non-computer science teachers on how to facilitate the integration of computational thinking skills to a broad spectrum of classes in the arts, humanities, sciences, social sciences, and mathematics. Our initial findings shared here are part of a larger NSF-funded research project (Award No. 2122367) which aims to better understand the barriers to entry and challenges for success faced by underrepresented secondary school students in computer science, through direct engagement with the students themselves. Throughout the 2022-23 academic year, the researchers have been working with a small team of secondary school teachers, students, and instructional designers, as well as university faculty in computer science, secondary education, and sociology to develop the CRPG-CSCT. The CRPG-CSCT is rooted in the tenets of culturally relevant pedagogy (Ladson-Billings, 1995) and borrows from Muhammad’s (2020) work in Cultivating Genius: An Equity Framework for Culturally and Historically Responsive Literacy. The CRPG-CCT is being developed over six day-long workshops held throughout the academic year. At the time of this submission, five of the six workshops had been completed. Each workshop utilized cogenerative dialogues (cogens) as the primary tool for organizing and sustaining participants’ engagement. Through cogens, participants more deeply learn about students’ cultural capital and the value of utilizing that capital within the classroom (Roth, Lawless, & Tobin, 2000). The success of cogens relies on following specific protocols (Emdin, 2016), such as listening attentively, ensuring there are equal opportunities for all participants to share, and affirming the experiences of other participants. The goal of a cogen is to reach a collective decision, based on the dialogue, that will positively impact students by explicitly addressing barriers to their engagement in the classroom. During each workshop, one member of the research team and one undergraduate research assistant observed the interactions among cogen participants and documented these in the form of ethnographic field notes. Another undergraduate research assistant took detailed notes during the workshop to record the content of small and large group discussions, presentations, and questions/responses throughout the workshops. A grounded theory approach was used to analyze the field notes. Additionally, at the conclusion of each workshop, participants completed a Cogen Feedback Survey (CFS) to gather additional information. The CFS were analyzed through open thematic coding, memos, and code frequencies. Our preliminary results demonstrate high levels of engagement from teacher and student participants during the workshops. Students identified that the cogen structure allowed them to participate comfortably, openly, and honestly. Further, students described feeling valued and heard. Students’ ideas and experiences were frequently affirmed, which served as an important step toward dismantling traditional teacher-student boundaries that might otherwise prevent them from sharing freely. Another result from the use of cogens was the shared experience of participants comprehending views from the other group’s perspective in the classroom. Students appreciated the opportunity to learn from teachers about their struggles in keeping students engaged. Teachers appreciated the opportunity to better understand students’ schooling experiences and how these may affirm or deny aspects of their identity. Finally, all participants shared meaningful suggestions and strategies for future workshops and for the collective betterment of the group. Initial findings shared here are important for several reasons. First, our findings suggest that cogens are an effective approach for fostering participants’ commitment to creating the conditions for students’ success in the classroom. Within the context of the workshops, cogens provided teachers, students, and faculty with opportunities to engage in authentic conversations for addressing the recruitment and retention problems in computer science for underrepresented students. These conversations often resulted in the development of tangible pedagogical approaches, examples, metaphors, and other strategies to directly address the recruitment and retention of underrepresented students in computer science. Finally, while we are still developing the CRPG-CSCT, cogens provided us with the opportunity to ensure the voices of teachers and students are well represented in and central to the document. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    This is a Complete Research paper. Understanding models is important for engineering students, but not often taught explicitly in first-year courses. Although there are many types of models in engineering, studies have shown that engineering students most commonly identify prototyping or physical models when asked about modeling. In order to evaluate students’ understanding of different types of models used in engineering and the effectiveness of interventions designed to teach modeling, a survey was developed. This paper describes development of a framework to categorize the types of engineering models that first-year engineering students discuss based on both previous literature and students’ responses to survey questions about models. In Fall 2019, the survey was administered to first-year engineering students to investigate their awareness of types of models and understanding of how to apply different types of models in solving engineering problems. Students’ responses to three questions from the survey were analyzed in this study: 1. What is a model in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields?, 2. List different types of models that you can think of., and 3. Describe each different type of model you listed. Responses were categorized by model type and the framework was updated through an iterative coding process. After four rounds of analysis of 30 different students’ responses, an acceptable percentage agreement was reached between independent researchers coding the data. Resulting frequencies of the various model types identified by students are presented along with representative student responses to provide insight into students’ understanding of models in STEM. This study is part of a larger project to understand the impact of modeling interventions on students’ awareness of models and their ability to build and apply models. 
    more » « less