Advertisement

ZDM

pp 1–16 | Cite as

Word problems in mathematics education: a survey

  • Lieven VerschaffelEmail author
  • Stanislaw Schukajlow
  • Jon Star
  • Wim Van Dooren
Survey Paper
  • 40 Downloads

Abstract

Word problems are among the most difficult kinds of problems that mathematics learners encounter. Perhaps as a result, they have been the object of a tremendous amount research over the past 50 years. This opening article gives an overview of the research literature on word problem solving, by pointing to a number of major topics, questions, and debates that have dominated the field. After a short introduction, we begin with research that has conceived word problems primarily as problems of comprehension, and we describe the various ways in which this complex comprehension process has been conceived theoretically as well as the empirical evidence supporting different theoretical models. Next we review research that has focused on strategies for actually solving the word problem. Strengths and weaknesses of informal and formal solution strategies—at various levels of learners’ mathematical development (i.e., arithmetic, algebra)—are discussed. Fourth, we address research that thinks of word problems as exercises in complex problem solving, requiring the use of cognitive strategies (heuristics) as well as metacognitive (or self-regulatory) strategies. The fifth section concerns the role of graphical representations in word problem solving. The complex and sometimes surprising results of research on representations—both self-made and externally provided ones—are summarized and discussed. As in many other domains of mathematics learning, word problem solving performance has been shown to be significantly associated with a number of general cognitive resources such as working memory capacity and inhibitory skills. Research focusing on the role of these general cognitive resources is reviewed afterwards. The seventh section discusses research that analyzes the complex relationship between (traditional) word problems and (genuine) mathematical modeling tasks. Generally, this research points to the gap between the artificial word problems learners encounter in their mathematics lessons, on the one hand, and the authentic mathematical modeling situations with which they are confronted in real life, on the other hand. Finally, we review research on the impact of three important elements of the teaching/learning environment on the development of learners’ word problem solving competence: textbooks, software, and teachers. It is shown how each of these three environmental elements may support or hinder the development of learners’ word problem solving competence. With this general overview of international research on the various perspectives on this complex and fascinating kind of mathematical problem, we set the scene for the empirical contributions on word problems that appear in this special issue.

Notes

References

  1. Achmetli, K., Schukajlow, S., & Rakoczy, K. (2019). Multiple solutions to solve real-world problems and students’ procedural and conceptual knowledge. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,100, 43–60.Google Scholar
  2. Alghamdi, A., Jitendra, A. K., & Lein, A. E. (2020). Solving multiplication and division word problems with schematic diagrams: The role of schema-based instruction in supporting mathematical thinking skills of students with mathematics learning disabilities. ZDM Mathematics Education, this issue (in press).Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences,4, 167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Apple, M. (1992). The text and cultural politics. Educational Researcher,21(7), 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berends, I. E., & van Lieshout, E. C. D. M. (2009). The effect of illustrations in arithmetic problem solving: Effects of increased cognitive load. Learning and Instruction,19, 345–353.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blum, W. (2015). Quality teaching of mathematical modelling: What do we know, what can we do? In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 73–96). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modelling, applications, and links to other subjects—State, trends and issues in mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics,22, 37–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Böckmann, M., & Schukajlow, S. (2018). Value of pictures in modelling problems from students’ perspective. In E. Bergqvist, M. Österholm, M. Granberg, & L. Sumpter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 263–270). Umeå: PME.Google Scholar
  9. Boonen, A. J. H., van Wesel, F., Jolles, J., & van der Schoot, M. (2014). The role of visual representation type, spatial ability, and reading comprehension in word problem solving: An item-level analysis in elementary school children. International Journal of Educational Research,68, 15–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2014.08.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield (Eds. & Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Jacobs, V., Fennema, E., & Empson, S. B. (1997). A longitudinal study of intervention and understanding in children’s multidigit addition and subtraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,29, 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1984). The acquisition of addition and subtraction concepts in grades one through three. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,15, 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chang, Y.-P., Krawitz, J., Schukajlow, S., & Yang, K.-J. (2020). Comparing German and Taiwanese secondary school students’ knowledge in solving mathematical modelling tasks requiring their assumptions. ZDM Mathematics Education, this issue (in press).Google Scholar
  14. Chapman, O. (2006). Classroom practices for context of mathematics word problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics,62, 211–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  16. Cramer, K., Post, T., & Currier, S. (1993). Learning and teaching ratio and proportion: Research implications. In D. T. Owens (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: Middle grades mathematics (pp. 159–178). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. Csíkos, C., & Szitányi, J. (2020). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in teaching word problem solving strategies. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  18. Csíkos, C., Szitányi, J., & Kelemen, R. (2012). The effects of using drawings in developing young children’s mathematical word problem solving: A design experiment with third-grade Hungarian students. Educational Studies in Mathematics,81, 47–65.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9360-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Daroczy, G., Wolska, M., Meurers, W. D., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2015). Word problems: A review of linguistic and numerical factors contributing to their difficulty. Frontiers in Psychology,6, 348.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., & Janssens, D. (1998). Solving problems involving length and area of similar plane figures and the illusion of linearity: An inquiry of the difficulties of secondary school students. Educational Studies in Mathematics,35, 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. De Corte, E., Greer, B., & Verschaffel, L. (1996). Learning and teaching mathematics. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 491–549). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (1987). The effect of semantic structure on first graders’ solution strategies of elementary addition and subtraction word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,18, 363–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. de Kock, W. D., & Harskamp, E. G. (2014). Can teachers in primary education implement a metacognitive computer programme for word problem solving in their mathematics classes? Educational Research and Evaluation,20, 231–250.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611.2014.901921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Depaepe, F., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Analysis of the realistic nature of word problems in upper elementary mathematics education. In L. Verschaffel, B. Greer, W. Van Dooren, & S. Mukhopadhyay (Eds.), Words and worlds: Modelling verbal descriptions of situations (pp. 245–264). Rotterdam: Sense Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Depaepe, F., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2010a). Teachers’ approaches towards word problem solving: Elaborating or restricting the problem context. Teaching and Teacher Education,26, 152–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Depaepe, F., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2010b). Teachers’ approaches towards heuristic and metacognitive skills and its relationship with students’ beliefs and problem-solving skills. ZDM—International Journal on Mathematics Education,42, 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dewolf, T., Van Dooren, W., Kellen, A., & Verschaffel, L. (2012). The influence of narrative and depictive elements in solving mathematical word problems realistically. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,11(1–2), 17–33.Google Scholar
  28. diSessa, A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,19, 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Elia, I. (2020). Word problem solving and pictorial representations: Insights from an exploratory study in kindergarten. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  30. Elia, I., & Philippou, G. (2004). The functions of pictures in problem solving. In M. J. Hoines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 327–334). Bergen, Norway: University College.Google Scholar
  31. Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives,19(4), 25–42.  https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fuson, K. C. (1992). Research on whole number addition and subtraction. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 243–275). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  33. Gerofsky, S. (1997). An exchange about word problems. For the Learning of Mathematics,17(2), 22–23.Google Scholar
  34. Gillard, E., Van Dooren, W., Schaeken, W., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Proportional reasoning as a heuristic-based process: Time constraint and dual-task considerations. Experimental Psychology,56, 92–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Goldin, G. A., & McClintock, E. (Eds.). (1984). Task variables in mathematical problem solving. Philadelphia: Franklin.Google Scholar
  36. Goulet-Lyle, M.-P., Voyer, D., & Verschaffel, L. (2020). How does teaching a step-by-step solution method impact students’ approach to mathematical word problem solving? ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  37. Greer, B. (1992). Multiplication and division as models of situations. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 276–295). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  38. Greer, B. (1993). The modeling perspective on wor(l)d problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,12, 239–250.Google Scholar
  39. Gros, H. (2019). What we count dictates how we count. A tale of two encodings. PhD thesis, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France.Google Scholar
  40. Gvozdic, K., & Sander, E. (2020). Learning to be an opportunistic word problem solver: Going beyond informal solving strategies. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  41. Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal,28, 567–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hegarty, M., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual–spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology,91, 684–689.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jitendra, A. K., & Hoff, K. (1996). The effects of schema-based instruction on the mathematical word-problem solving performance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities,29, 422–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Kaiser, G. (2017). The teaching and learning of mathematical modeling. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 267–291). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  46. Kaiser, G., & Brand, S. (2015). Modelling competencies: Past development and further perspectives. In G. Stillman, W. Blum, & M. S. Biembengut (Eds.), Mathematical modelling in education research and practice. Cultural, social and cognitive influences (pp. 129–149). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390–419). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  48. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up. Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  49. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review,85, 363–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kouba, V. (1989). Children’s solution strategies for equivalent set multiplication and division word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,20, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Krawitz, J., Schukajlow, S., & Van Dooren, W. (2018). Unrealistic responses to realistic problems with missing information: What are important barriers? Educational Psychology,38, 1221–1238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lave, J. (1992). Word problems: A microcosm of theories of learning. In P. Light & G. Butterworth (Eds.), Context and cognition: Ways of learning and knowing (pp. 74–92). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  53. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2005). Modeling and argument in the elementary grades. In T. A. Romberg, T. P. Carpenter, & F. Dremock (Eds.), Understanding mathematics and science matters (pp. 29–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  54. Leiss, D. (2010). Adaptive Lehrerinterventionen beim mathematischen Modellieren—empirische Befunde einer vergleichenden Labor- und Unterrichtsstudie. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik,31, 197–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Leiss, D., Plath, J., & Schwippert, K. (2019). Language and mathematics - Key factors influencing the comprehension process in reality based tasks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning,21, 131–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Leiss, D., Schukajlow, S., Blum, W., Messner, R., & Pekrun, R. (2010). The role of the situation model in mathematical modelling—task analyses, student competencies, and teacher interventions. Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik,31, 119–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lester, F., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D. (1989). The role of metacognition in mathematical problem solving. A study of two seventh classes. (Final report to the National Science Foundation, NSF project n° MDR 85-50346). Bloomington: Indiana University, Mathematics Education Development Center.Google Scholar
  58. Lynn Fuchs, L. (2020). The role of working memory in mathematical word-problem solving Implications for instruction and intervention. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  59. Maaß, K. (2006). What are modeling competencies? ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education,38, 113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science,26, 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (1997). IMPROVE: A multidimensional method for teaching mathematics in heterogeneous classrooms. American Educational Research Journal,34, 365–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (2014). Critical maths in innovative societies: The effects of metacognitive pedagogies on mathematical reasoning. Paris, France: OECD.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mevarech, Z., Verschaffel, L., & De Corte, E. (2018). Metacognitive pedagogies in mathematics classrooms: From kindergarten to college and beyond. In D. H. Schunk & J. A. Greene (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 109–123). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Mulligan, J., & Mitchelmore, M. (1997). Young children’s intuitive models of multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,28, 309–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ng, S.-F., & Lee, K. (2005). How primary five pupils use the model method to solve word problems. The Mathematics Educator,9(1), 60–83.Google Scholar
  66. Niss, M. (2001). Issues and problems of research on the teaching and learning of applications and modelling. In J. F. Matos, W. Blum, S. K. Houston, & S. P. Carreira (Eds.), Modelling and mathematics education. ICTMA 9: Applications in science and technology (pp. 72–89). Chichester: Horwood.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (1995). Do problem situations influence children’s understanding of the commutativity of multiplication? Mathematical Cognition,1, 245–260.Google Scholar
  68. Orrantia, J., Munez, D., & Tarin, J. (2014). Connecting goals and actions during reading: The role of illustrations. Reading and Writing,27, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Palm, T. (2002). The realism of mathematical school tasks. Features and consequences. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Umea, Sweden.Google Scholar
  70. Palm, T., & Burman, L. (2004). Reality in mathematics assessment: An analysis of task-reality concordance in Finnish and Swedish national assessments. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education,9(3), 1–33.Google Scholar
  71. Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pongsakdi, N., Kajamies, A., Veermans, K., Hannula-Sormunen, M. M., Lertola, K., Vauras, M., Lehtinen, E. (2020). What makes mathematical word problem solving challenging? Exploring the roles of word problem characteristics, text comprehension, and arithmetic skills. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  73. Powell, S. R. (2020). The role of algebraic reasoning within a word-problem intervention for third-grade students with mathematics difficulty. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  74. Reed, S. K. (1999). Word problems. Research and curriculum reform. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  75. Rellensmann, J., Schukajlow, S., & Leopold, C. (2017). Make a drawing. Effects of strategic knowledge, drawing accuracy, and type of drawing on students’ mathematical modelling performance. Educational Studies in Mathematics,95, 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Rellensmann, J., Schukajlow, S., & Leopold, C. (2020). Measuring and investigating strategic knowledge about drawing to solve geometrical modelling problems. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  77. Reusser, K. (1989). Vom Text zur Situation zur Gleichung. Kognitive Simulation von Sprachverständnis und Mathematisierung beim Lösen von Textaufgaben. Bern: Universität Bern.Google Scholar
  78. Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children’s problem-solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  79. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically. Problem solving, metacognition and sense-making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  80. Schukajlow, S., Achmetli, K., & Rakoczy, K. (2019a). Does constructing multiple solutions for real-world problems affect self-efficacy? Educational Studies in Mathematics,100, 43–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Schukajlow, S., Blomberg, J., & Rellensmann, J. (2019b). I enjoy making drawings! Enjoyment, knowledge about drawings, use of drawings, and students’ performance. In M. Graven, H. Venkat, A. A. Essien, & P. Vale (Eds.), Proceedings of the 43th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 297–304). Pretoria, South Africa: PME.Google Scholar
  82. Schukajlow, S., Kaiser, G., & Stillman, G. (2018). Empirical research on teaching and learning of mathematical modelling: A survey on the current state-of-the-art. ZDM Mathematics Education,50, 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Schukajlow, S., Kolter, J., & Blum, W. (2015). Scaffolding mathematical modelling with a solution plan. ZDM Mathematics Education,47, 1241–1254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Schukajlow, S., Leiss, D., Pekrun, R., Blum, W., Müller, M., & Messner, R. (2012). Teaching methods for modelling problems and students’ task-specific enjoyment, value, interest and self-efficacy expectations. Educational Studies in Mathematics,79, 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Stigler, J. W., Fuson, K. C., Ham, M., & Kim, M. S. (1986). An analysis of addition and subtraction word problems in American and Soviet elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction,3, 153–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Stillman, G. (2011). Applying metacognitive knowledge and strategies in applications and modeling tasks at second-aryschool. In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. B. Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modeling: ICTMA14 (pp. 165–180). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Strohmaier, A. R., Schiepe-Tiska, A., Chang, Y.-P., Müller, F., Lin, F.-L., & Reiss, K. M. (2020). Comparing eye movements during mathematical word problem solving in Chinese and German. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  88. Swafford, J. O., & Langrall, C. W. (2000). Grade 6 student’s pre-instructional use of equations to describe and represent problem situations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,31, 89–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Swetz, F. (2009). Culture and the development of mathematics: A historical perspective. In B. Greer, S. Mukhupadhyay, A. B. Powell, & N. Nelson-Barber (Eds.), Culturally responsive mathematics education (pp. 11–42). Routledge: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  90. Teong, S. K. (2003). The effect of metacognitive training on mathematical word-problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,19, 46–55.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00005.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Thevenot, C. (2010). Arithmetic word problem solving: Evidence for the construction of a mental model. Acta Psychologica,133, 90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Thevenot, C., & Barrouillet, P. (2015). Arithmetic word problem solving and mental representations. In R. Cohen Kadosh & A. Dowker (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 158–179). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Uesaka, Y., & Manalo, E. (2012). Task-related factors that influence the spontaneous use of diagrams in math word problems. Applied Cognitive Psychology,26, 251–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (Ed.). (2001). Children learn mathematics. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, University of Utrecht.Google Scholar
  95. Van Dooren, W., & Inglis, M. (2015). Inhibitory control in mathematical thinking, learning and problem solving: A survey. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education,47, 713–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. van Essen, G. (1991). Heuristics and arithmetic word problems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. State University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  97. van Lieshout, E. C. D. M., & Xenidou-Dervou, I. (2020). Simple pictorial mathematics problems for children: Locating possible sources of cognitive load and how to reduce it. ZDM Mathematics Education(this issue, in press).Google Scholar
  98. Vergnaud, G. (1983). Multiplicative structures. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 127–174). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  99. Verschaffel, L. (2002). Taking the modeling perspective seriously at the elementary school level: Promises and pitfalls (Plenary lecture). In A. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 1. (pp. 64–82). School of Education and Professional Development, University of East Anglia, UK.Google Scholar
  100. Verschaffel, L. (2016). Get the picture? On the role of graphical representations in the solution of mathematical word problems. Plenary lecture at the Conference of the EARLI SIG 2, Comprehension of Text and Graphics, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  101. Verschaffel, L. (2019). 40 years of mathematical word problem solving research (in Leuven): What did I learn from it and want to share? Invited lecture presented at a workshop organized by the University of Roskilde, Denmark.Google Scholar
  102. Verschaffel, L., & De Corte, E. (1997). Word problems. A vehicle for promoting authentic mathematical understanding and problem solving in the primary school. In T. Nunes & P. Bryant (Eds.), Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective (pp. 69–97). Hove, East Sussex: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  103. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., & Borghart, I. (1997). Pre-service teachers’ conceptions and beliefs about the role of real-world knowledge in mathematical modelling of school word problems. Learning and Instruction,4, 339–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word problems. Learning and Instructi-on,4, 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H., & Ratinckx, E. (1999). Design and evaluation of a learning environment for mathematical modeling and problem solving in upper elementary school children. Mathematical Thinking and Learning,1, 195–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Van Dooren, W. (2013a). Mathematical problem solving. In P. Andrews & T. Rowland (Eds.), Masterclass in mathematics education. International perspectives on teaching and learning (pp. 113–124). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  107. Verschaffel, L., Reybrouck, M., Van Dooren, W., & Degraeuwe, G. (2013b). The relative importance of children’s criteria for representational adequacy in the perception of simple sonic stimuli. Psychology of Music,41, 691–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Verschaffel, L., Depaepe, F., & Van Dooren, W. (2014). Word problems in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 641–645). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  109. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  110. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., Van Dooren, W., & Mukhopadhyay, S. (Eds.). (2009). Words and worlds: Modelling verbal descriptions of situations. Rotterdam: Sense Publications.Google Scholar
  111. Vicente, S., Orrantia, J., & Verschaffel, L. (2007). Influence of situational and conceptual rewording on word problem solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology,77, 829–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Vicente, S., Rosario Sanchez, M., & Verschaffel, L. (in press). Word problem solving approaches in mathematics textbooks: a comparison between Spain and Singapore. European Journal of Psychology of Education.Google Scholar
  113. Wang, A. Y., Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2016). Cognitive and linguistic predictors of mathematical word problems with and without irrelevant information. Learning and Individual Differences,52, 79–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentations, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,27, 458–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Yerushalmy, M. (2006). Slower algebra students meet faster tools: Solving algebraic word problems with graphing software. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,37, 356–387.Google Scholar
  116. Yoshida, H., Verschaffel, L., & De Corte, E. (1997). Realistic considerations in solving problematic word problems: Do Japanese and European children have the same difficulties? Learning and Instruction,7, 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Instructional Psychology and TechnologyUniversity of Leuven, KU LeuvenLouvainBelgium
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of Münster, Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität MünsterMünsterGermany
  3. 3.Graduate School of EducationHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations