Sixth Grade Students’ Performance, Misconceptions, and Confidence When Judging the Reasonableness of Computational Results
Judging the reasonableness of computational results is pivotal for students to understand mathematical concepts. This domain is the most sensitive to the presence of misconceptions in mathematics. Confidence ratings can serve as a measure of the strength of students’ conceptual understanding. This study investigated the performance, misconceptions, and confidence ratings of 942 Hong Kong sixth grade students when they were asked to judge the reasonableness of computational results. The results showed that the students performed unsatisfactorily at judging the reasonableness, with an average score of 3.45 (out of 8). Slightly more than half of the students (53.72%) selected the correct computational results, but more than 60% of those students could not judge the reasonableness of the computational results (49.71% had misconceptions and 11.24% simply guessed the answers). In addition, only 20.82% and 18.23% of the students could apply number-sense- and rule-based methods to judge the reasonableness, respectively. Moreover, only 5.73% of the students showed high performance with a high confidence rating, 3.18% exhibited low performance with a low confidence rating, and 35.46% of them showed low performance with a high confidence rating. Furthermore, this study discusses students’ misconceptions, the implications of the study, and suggestions for future research.
KeywordsConfidence Hong Kong Reasonableness Misconceptions Performance
This article was a part of a research project supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, with grant no. MOST 105-2511-S-415-003-MY3. Any opinions expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Council, Taiwan (Republic of China). The authors thank Dr. Ka Luen Cheung (The Education University of Hong Kong) and Cheng-Yi Chuang, M.Ed. (National Chiayi University, Taiwan) for their support in handling the data for the study.
- Batanero, C., & Sanchez, E. (2005). What is the nature of high school students’ conception and misconceptions about probability? In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 241–266). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
- Bonotto, C. (2005). How informal out-of-school mathematics can help students make sense of formal in-school mathematics: The case of multiplying by decimal numbers. Mathematical Thinking & Learning: An International Journal, 7(4), 313–344. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl07043.
- Bragg, L. A., & Herbert, S. (2017). A “true” story about mathematical reasoning made easy. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 22(4), 3–6.Google Scholar
- Clarke, D. M., Clarke, D. J., & Sullivan, P. (2012). Reasoning in the Australian curriculum: Understanding its meaning and using the relevant language. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 17(3), 28–32.Google Scholar
- Devlin, K. (2017). Number sense: The most important mathematical concept in 21st Century K-12 Education. HUFFPOST. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/number-sense-the-most-important-mathematical-conceptus58695887e4b068764965c2e0. Accessed 11 April 2018.
- Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
- Green, M., Piel, J., & Flowers, C. (2008). Reversing education majors’arithmetic misconceptions with short-term instruction using manipulatives. Charlotte, NC: Heldref Publications.Google Scholar
- Hiebert, J. (1992). Mathematical, cognitive, and instructional analyzes of decimal fractions. In G. Leinhardt, R. Putman, & R. Hattrup (Eds.), Analysis of arithmetic for mathematics teaching (pp. 283-322). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
- Kaltakci Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A review and comparison of diagnostic instruments to identify students’ misconceptions in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), 989–1008. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Liu, S., & Meng, L. (2010). Re-examining factor structure of the attitudinal items from TIMSS 2003 in cross-cultural study of mathematics self-concept. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 30, 699–712. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2010.501102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McIntosh, A., Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (1992). A proposed framework for examining basic number sense. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12, 2–8.Google Scholar
- McIntosh, A., Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., Bana, J., & Farrel, B. (1997). Number sense in school mathematics: Student performance in four countries. Perth, Australia: Edith Cowan University.Google Scholar
- McIntosh, A., & Sparrow, L. (2004). Beyond written computation. Perth, Australia: Mathematics, Science & Technology Education Centre (MASTEC).Google Scholar
- Menon, R. (2004). Elementary school children’s number sense. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Retrieved 12 Aug 2016 from http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal/default.htm.
- Merenluoto, K., & Lehtinen, E. (2002). Conceptual change in mathematics: Understanding the real numbers. In M. Limo’n & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change. Issues in theory and practice (pp. 233–258). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic publishers.Google Scholar
- Merenluoto, K., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Number concept and conceptual change: Towards a systemic model of the processes of change. Learning and Instruction, 14(5), 519–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 International Results in Mathematics. Retrieved 11 April 2018 from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS international study center website: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/. Accessed 11 April 2018.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2017). Instructional programs from prekindergarten through grade 12. Retrieved 18 December 2017 from http://www.nctm.org/Standards-and-Positions/Principles-and-Standards/Algebra/.
- Organization for Economic Co-operation & Development [OECD]. (2016). PISA 2015 Results in Focus. Paris, France: OECD.Google Scholar
- Reys, R. (1985). Estimation. Arithmetic Teacher, 32, 37–41.Google Scholar
- Reys, R. E., & Noda, N. (1994). Computational alternative for the 21th century: Cross cultural perspectives from Japan and the United States. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
- Sowder, J. (1992). Estimation and number sense. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 371–389). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Stacey, K., & Steinle, V. (1998). Refining the classification of students’ interpretations of decimal notation. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 6, 49–59.Google Scholar
- Stafylidou, S., & Vosniadou, S. (2004). The development of students’ understanding of the numerical value of fractions. Learning and Instruction, 14(5), 503–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Steinle, V., & Stacey, K. (2003). Grade-related trends in the prevalence and persistence of decimal misconceptions. In N. A. Pateman, B. Dougherty, & J. T. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 joint meeting of PME and PMENA (pp. 259–266). Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
- Swan, M. (2001). Dealing with misconceptions in mathematics. In P. Gates (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching (pp. 147–165). London, England: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
- Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2007). Whole number concepts and operations. In F. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 557–628). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
- Vlassis, J. (2004). Making sense of the minus sign or becoming flexible in “negativity”. Learning and Instruction, 14(5), 469–484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vosniadou, S., & Verschaffel, L. (2004). Extending the conceptual change approach to mathematics learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 14(5), 445–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar