Creative and algorithmic mathematical reasoning: effects of transfer-appropriate processing and effortful struggle

Two separate studies, Jonsson et al. (J. Math Behav. 2014;36: 20–32) and Karlsson Wirebring et al. (Trends Neurosci Educ. 2015;4(1–2):6–14), showed that learning mathematics using creative mathematical reasoning and constructing their own solution methods can be more efficient than if students use algorithmic reasoning and are given the solution procedures. It was argued that effortful struggle was the key that explained this difference. It was also argued that the results could not be explained by the effects of transfer-appropriate processing, although this was not empirically investigated. This study evaluated the hypotheses of transfer-appropriate processing and effortful struggle in relation to the specific characteristics associated with algorithmic reasoning task and creative mathematical reasoning task. In a between-subjects design, upper-secondary students were matched according to their working memory capacity.

The main finding was that the superior performance associated with practicing creative mathematical reasoning was mainly supported by effortful struggle, however, there was also an effect of transfer-appropriate processing. It is argued that students need to struggle with important mathematics that in turn facilitates the construction of knowledge. It is further argued that the way we construct mathematical tasks have consequences for how much effort students allocate to their task-solving attempt.     

Mathematical reasoning in teachers’ presentations

This paper presents a study of the opportunities presented to students that allow them to learn different types of mathematical reasoning during teachers’ ordinary task solving presentations. The characteristics of algorithmic and creative reasoning that are seen in the presentations are analyzed. We find that most task solutions are based on available algorithms, often without arguments that justify the reasoning, which may lead to rote learning. The students are given some opportunities to see aspects of creative reasoning, such as reflection and arguments that are anchored in the mathematical properties of the task components, but in relatively modest ways.     

Learning mathematics through algorithmic and creative reasoning

There are extensive concerns pertaining to the idea that students do not develop sufficient mathematical competence. This problem is at least partially related to the teaching of procedure-based learning. Although better teaching methods are proposed, there are very limited research insights as to why some methods work better than others, and the conditions under which these methods are applied. The present paper evaluates a model based on students’ own creation of knowledge, denoted creative mathematically founded reasoning (CMR), and compare this to a procedure-based model of teaching that is similar to what is commonly found in schools, denoted algorithmic reasoning (AR). In the present study, CMR was found to outperform AR. It was also found cognitive proficiency was significantly associated to test task performance. However the analysis also showed that the effect was more pronounced for the AR group.     

Levels of arithmetic reasoning in solving an open-ended problem

This paper presents the results of an experimental teaching carried out on 12-year-old students. An open-ended task was given to them and they had not been taught the algorithmic process leading to the solution. The formal solution to the problem refers to a system of two linear equations with two unknown quantities. In this mathematical activity, students worked cooperatively. They discussed their discoveries in groups of four and then presented their answers to the whole class developing a rich communication. This study describes the characteristic arguments that represent certain different forms of reasoning that emerged during the process of justifying the solutions of the problem. The findings of this research show that within an environment conducive to creativity, which encourages collaboration, exploration and sharing ideas, students can be engaged in developing multiple mathematical strategies, posing new questions, creating informal proofs, showing beauty and elegance and bringing out that problem solving is a powerful way of learning mathematics.     

Students’ challenges with polar functions: covariational reasoning and plotting in the polar coordinate system

Covariational reasoning has been the focus of many studies but only a few looked into this reasoning in the polar coordinate system. In fact, research on student's familiarity with polar coordinates and graphing in the polar coordinate system is scarce. This paper examines the challenges that students face when plotting polar curves using the corresponding plot in the Cartesian plane. In particular, it examines how students coordinate the covariation in the polar coordinate system with the covariation in the Cartesian one. The research, which was conducted in a sophomore level Calculus class at an American university operating in Lebanon, investigates in addition the challenges when students synchronize the reasoning between the two coordinate systems. For this, the mental actions that students engage in when performing covariational tasks are examined. Results show that coordinating the value of one polar variable with changes in the other was well achieved. Coordinating the direction of change of one variable with changes in the other variable was more challenging for students especially when the radial distance r is negative.     

A task that elicits reasoning: A dual analysis

This paper reports on the forms of reasoning elicited as fourth grade students in a suburban district and sixth grade students in an urban district worked on similar tasks involving reasoning with the use of Cuisenaire rods. Analysis of the two data sets shows similarities in the reasoning used by both groups of students on specific tasks, and the tendency of a particular task to elicit numerous forms of reasoning in both groups of students. Attributes of that task and ways that those attributes can be replicated in other domains may have implications in the teaching of early reasoning.     

From fractions to proportional reasoning: a cognitive schemes of operation approach

Four seventh grade students participated in a constructivist teaching experiment in which manipulatives within a computer microworld were used to solve fractional reasoning tasks followed by tasks that involve concepts of rate, ratio and proportion. Through a retrospective analysis of video tapes, their thinking processes were analyzed from the perspective of the types of cognitive schemes of operation used as they engaged in the given problem situations. One result of the study indicates that the modifications of the students’ available schemes of operation when solving the fractional reasoning tasks formed a basis for the cognitive schemes of operation used in their solutions of tasks involving proportionality.     

Types of reasoning required in university exams in mathematics

Empirical research shows that students often use reasoning founded on copying algorithms or recalling facts (imitative reasoning) when solving mathematical tasks. Research also indicate that a focus on this type of reasoning might weaken the students’ understanding of the underlying mathematical concepts. It is therefore important to study the types of reasoning students have to perform in order to solve exam tasks and pass exams. The purpose of this study is to examine what types of reasoning students taking introductory calculus courses are required to perform. Tasks from 16 exams produced at four different Swedish universities were analyzed and sorted into task classes. The analysis resulted in several examples of tasks demanding different types of mathematical reasoning. The results also show that about 70% of the tasks were solvable by imitative reasoning and that 15 of the exams could be passed using only imitative reasoning.     

Ways in which engaging with someone else’s reasoning is productive

Classrooms which involve students in mathematical discourse are becoming ever more prominent for the simple reason that they have been shown to support student learning and affinity for content. While support for outcomes has been shown, less is known about how or why such strategies benefit students. In this paper, we report on one such finding: namely that when students engage with another’s reasoning, as necessitated by interactive conversation, it supports their own conceptual growth and change. This qualitative analysis of 10 university students provides insight into what engaging with another’s reasoning entails and suggests that higher levels of engagement support higher levels of conceptual growth. We conclude with implications for instructional practice and future research.     

Backward transfer influences from quadratic functions instruction on students’ prior ways of covariational reasoning about linear functions

The study reported in this article examined the ways in which new mathematics learning influences students’ prior ways of reasoning. We conceptualize this kind of influence as a form of transfer of learning called backward transfer. The focus of our study was on students’ covariational reasoning about linear functions before and after they participated in a multi-lesson instructional unit on quadratic functions. The subjects were 57 students from two authentic algebra classrooms at two local high schools. Qualitative analysis suggested that quadratic functions instruction did influence students’ covariational reasoning in terms of the number of quantities and the level of covariational reasoning they reasoned with. These results further the field’s understanding of backward transfer and could inform how to better support students’ abilities to engage in covariational reasoning.     

Variation of student numerical and figural reasoning approaches by pattern generalization type,strategy use and grade level

This paper explored variation of student numerical and figural reasoning approaches across different pattern generalization types and across grade level. An instrument was designed for this purpose. The instrument was given to a sample of 1232 students from grades 4 to 11 from five schools in Lebanon. Analysis of data showed that the numerical reasoning approach seems to be more dominant than the figural reasoning approach for the near and far pattern generalization types but not for the immediate generalization type. The findings showed that for the recursive strategy, the numerical reasoning approach seems to be more dominant than the figural reasoning approach for each of the three pattern generalization types. However, the figural reasoning approach seems to be more dominant than the numerical reasoning approach for the functional strategy, for each generalization type. The findings also showed that the numerical reasoning was more dominant than the figural reasoning in lower grade levels (grades 4 and 5) for each generalization type. In contrast, the figural reasoning became more dominant than the numerical reasoning in the upper grade levels (grades 10 and 11).     

Investigating written expressions of mathematical reasoning for students with learning disabilities

Assessment results from two open-construction response mathematical tasks involving fractions and decimals were used to investigate written expression of mathematical reasoning for students with learning disabilities. The solutions and written responses of 51 students with learning disabilities in fourth and fifth grade were analyzed on four primary dimensions: (a) accuracy, (b) five elements of mathematical reasoning, (c) five elements of mathematical writing, and (d) vocabulary use. Results indicate most students were not accurate in their problem solution and communicated minimal mathematical reasoning in their written expression. In addition, students tended to use general vocabulary rather than academic precise math vocabulary and students who provided a visual representation were more likely to answer accurately. To further clarify the students struggles with mathematical reasoning, error analysis indicated a variety of error patterns existed and tended to vary widely by problem type. Our findings call for more instruction and intervention focused on supporting students mathematical reasoning through written expression. Implications for research and practice are presented.     

An analytical comparison of students’ reasoning in the context of Inquiry-Oriented Instruction: The case of span and linear independence

In this report we analyze differences in reasoning about span and linear independence by comparing written work of 126 linear algebra students whose instructors received support to implement a particular inquiry-oriented (IO) instructional approach compared to 129 students whose instructors did not receive that support. Our analysis of students’ responses to open-ended questions indicated that IO students’ concept images of span and linear independence were more aligned with the formal concept definition than the concept images of Non-IO students. Additionally, IO students exhibited more coordinated conceptual understandings and used deductive reasoning at higher rates than Non-IO students. We provide illustrative examples of systematic differences in how students from the two groups reasoned about span and linear independence.     

Capturing and characterizing students’ strategic algebraic reasoning through cognitively demanding tasks with focus on representations

In mathematics education, it is important to assess valued practices such as problem solving and communication. Yet, often we assess students based on correct solutions over their problem solving strategies—strategies that can uncover important mathematical understanding. In this article, we first present a framework of competencies required for strategic reasoning to solve cognitively demanding algebra tasks and assessment tools to capture evidence of these competencies. Then, we qualitatively describe characteristics of student reasoning for various performance levels (low, medium, and high) of eighth-grade students, focusing on generating and interpreting algebraic representations. We argue this analysis allows a more comprehensive and complex perspective of student understanding. Our findings lay groundwork to investigate the continuum of algebraic understanding, and may help educators identify specific areas of students’ strength and weakness when solving cognitively demanding tasks.     

Predetermined accommodations with a standardized testing protocol: Examining two accommodation supports for developing fraction thinking in students with mathematical difficulties

This study examined the effects of two pre-determined accommodations that were provided in a standardized testing. The two accommodations were meant to help students with difficulties in mathematics (SDMs) engage in unit thinking, reasoning, and coordination and consequently improve their ability to process fraction tasks. 23 middle school SDMs took the following tests and were asked to explain their solutions: a baseline fraction test without any accommodation; an annotated test with bolded information and additional simplified explanations; and a warming- up test that involved whole-number multiplicative reasoning tasks followed by the baseline test. Results show that while SDMs were able to construct and coordinate fraction units to solve fraction problems when appropriate accommodations were provided, standardized assessment with a predetermined “one-size-fits -all” accommodation could not meet the specific needs of all students with mathematics learning difficulties.     

The parametric nature of two students’ covariational reasoning

Researchers have argued that covariational reasoning is foundational for learning a variety of mathematics topics. We extend prior research by examining two students’ covariational reasoning with attention to the extent they became consciously aware of the parametric nature of their reasoning. We first describe our theoretical background including different conceptions of covariation researchers have found useful when characterizing student reasoning. We then present two students’ activities during a teaching experiment in which they constructed and reasoned about covarying quantities. We highlight aspects of the students’ reasoning that we conjectured created an intellectual need that resulted in their constructing a parameter quantity or attribute, a need we explored in closing teaching episodes. We discuss implications of these results for perspectives on covariational reasoning, students’ understandings of graphs and parametric functions, and areas of future research.     

Promoting uncertainty to support preservice teachers’ reasoning about the tangent relationship

Including opportunities for students to experience uncertainty in solving mathematical tasks can prompt learners to resolve the uncertainty, leading to mathematical understanding. In this article, we examine how preservice secondary mathematics teachers’ thinking about a trigonometric relationship was impacted by a series of tasks that prompted uncertainty. Using dynamic geometry software, we asked preservice teachers to compare angle measures of lines on a coordinate grid to their slope values, beginning by investigating lines whose angle measures were in a near-linear relationship to their slopes. After encountering and resolving the uncertainty of the exact relationship between the values, preservice teachers connected what they learned to the tangent relationship and demonstrated new ways of thinking that entail quantitative and covariational reasoning about this trigonometric relationship. We argue that strategically using uncertainty can be an effective way of promoting preservice teachers’ reasoning about the tangent relationship.     

Mathematical Thinking Involved in U.S. and Chinese Students' Solving of Process-Constrained and Process-Open Problems

This study examined U.S. and Chinese 6th-grade students' mathematical thinking and reasoning involved in solving 6 process-constrained and 6 process-open problems. The Chinese sample (from Guiyang, Guizhou) had a significantly higher mean score than the U.S. sample (from Milwaukee, Wisconsin) on the process-constrained tasks, but the sample of U.S. students had a significantly higher mean score than the sample of the Chinese students on the process-open tasks. A qualitative analysis of students' responses was conducted to understand the mathematical thinking and reasoning involved in solving these problems. The qualitative results indicate that the Chinese sample preferred to use routine algorithms and symbolic representations, whereas the U.S. sample preferred to use concrete visual representations. Such a qualitative analysis of students' responses provided insights into U.S. and Chinese students' mathematical thinking, thereby facilitating interpretation of the cross-national differences in solving the process-constrained and process-open problems.     

Mathematical Thinking Involved in U.S. and Chinese Students' Solving of Process-Constrained and Process-Open Problems

This study examined U.S. and Chinese 6th-grade students' mathematical thinking and reasoning involved in solving 6 process-constrained and 6 process-open problems. The Chinese sample (from Guiyang, Guizhou) had a significantly higher mean score than the U.S. sample (from Milwaukee, Wisconsin) on the process-constrained tasks, but the sample of U.S. students had a significantly higher mean score than the sample of the Chinese students on the process-open tasks. A qualitative analysis of students' responses was conducted to understand the mathematical thinking and reasoning involved in solving these problems. The qualitative results indicate that the Chinese sample preferred to use routine algorithms and symbolic representations, whereas the U.S. sample preferred to use concrete visual representations. Such a qualitative analysis of students' responses provided insights into U.S. and Chinese students' mathematical thinking, thereby facilitating interpretation of the cross-national differences in solving the process-constrained and process-open problems.