# Exploring an innovative approach to teaching mathematics through the use of challenging tasks: a New Zealand perspective

## Abstract

This paper reports on a New Zealand iteration of the Encouraging Persistence, Maintaining Challenge (EPMC) project, which proposes that students learn mathematics best when they build connections between mathematical ideas for themselves. This iteration explores the actions, perceptions and learning of 12 primary teachers and their 281 students during the implementation of a set of challenging tasks related to geometric reasoning. The teachers launched the suggested tasks, ensuring that the challenge was maintained. The students explored these tasks with minimal input from the teacher, and learning was summarised and extended. The teachers were positive about the intervention. The challenging task approach enabled students’ thinking became visible and, at times, the teachers’ prior perceptions of their students’ ability were challenged. A highly significant difference between the students’ pre- and post-assessment scores was found. The students were supported to have autonomy in their learning and make mathematical connections themselves. The students became less reliant on their teachers’ help and were positive about their involvement in the project.

## Keywords

Mathematics Challenging tasks Persistence Confusion Geometry Lesson structure## Notes

## References

- Anderson, J. (2014). Forging new opportunities for problem solving in Australian mathematics classrooms through the first national mathematics curriculum. In Y. Li & G. Lappan (Eds.),
*Mathematics curriculum in school education*(pp. 209–229). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Anthony, G., & Walshaw, M. (2009). Effective pedagogy in mathematics. In
*Educational series—19*. Brussels: International Academy of Education, Geneva.Google Scholar - Boaler, J. (2016).
*Mathematical mindsets: unleashing students’ potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching*. San Francesco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar - Cheeseman, J., Clarke, D., Roche, A., & Wilson, K. (2013). Teachers’ views of the challenging elements of a task. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.),
*Mathematics education: yesterday, today and tomorrow Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia*(pp. 154–161). Melbourne: MERGA.Google Scholar - Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson, & M. Otte (Eds.),
*Perspectives on mathematics education*(pp. 243–307). Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.),
*Handbook of research on teaching*(pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar - Cobb, P., Jackson, K., & Dunlap Sharpe, C. (2016). Conducting design studies to investigate and support mathematics students’ and teachers’ learning. In J. Cai (Ed.),
*Compendium for research in mathematics education*(pp. 208–233). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Desforges, C., & Cockburn, A. (1987).
*Understanding the mathematics teacher: a study of practice in first schools*. London: The Palmer Press.Google Scholar - Dooley, T. (2012). Constructing and consolidating mathematical entities in the context of whole class discussion. In J. Dindyal, L. P. Cheng, & S. F. Ng (Eds.),
*Mathematics education: Expanding horizons. Proceedings of the 35th conference of the Mathematics Education Group of Australasia*(pp. 234–241). Singapore: MERGA.Google Scholar - Dweck, C. S. (2000).
*Self-theories: their role in motivation, personality, and development*. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar - Furinghetti, F., & Pehkonen, E. (2002). Rethinking characterizations of beliefs. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.),
*Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education*(pp. 39–57). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Gladwell, M. (2008).
*Outliers: the story of success*. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar - Hill, H., Ball, D., & Schilling, S. (2008). Unpacking pedagogical content knowledge: Conceptualising and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39*(4), 372–400.Google Scholar - Ingram, N. (2011). Affect and identity: The mathematical journeys of adolescents. (PhD doctoral dissertation), University of Otago, New Zealand.Google Scholar
- Ingram, N., Linsell, C., Holmes, M., Livy, S., & Sullivan, P. (2016). Teacher actions that encourage students to persist in solving challenging mathematical tasks. In B. White, M. Chinnappan, & S. Trenholm (Eds.), Opening Up Mathematics Education Research. Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 657–660). Adelaide: MERGA.Google Scholar
- Ingram, N., Williamson-Leadley, S., & Pratt, K., (2016). Showing and Telling: Using tablet technology to engage students in mathematics.
*Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28*(1), 123–147Google Scholar - Jackson, K., Garrison, A., Wilson, J., Gibbons, L., & Shahan, E. (2013). Exploring relationships between setting up complex tasks and opportunities to learn in concluding whole-class discussions in middle-grades mathematics instruction.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44*(4), 646–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001).
*Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics*. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar - Linsell, C., Holmes, M., Ingram, N., Livy, S., & Sullivan, P. (2016). Perceptions of challenging tasks and achievement by New Zealand students. In B. White, M. Chinnappan, & S. Trenholm (Eds.), Opening Up Mathematics Education Research. Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 661–664). Adelaide: MERGA.Google Scholar
- Livy, S., Holmes, M., Ingram, N., Linsell, C., & Sullivan, P. (2016). A highly capable Year 6 student’s response to a challenging mathematical task. In B. White, M. Chinnappan, & S. Trenholm (Eds.), Opening Up Mathematics Education Research. Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 661-664). Adelaide: MERGAGoogle Scholar
- Ministry of Education. (2007).
*The New Zealand curriculum*. Wellington: Learning Media Limited.Google Scholar - Ministry of Education. (2008).
*Numeracy professional development projects: Book 3 getting started*. Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar - Op’t Eynde, P., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2002). Framing students’ mathematics-related beliefs. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.),
*Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education?*(pp. 13–37). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014).
*Do students have the drive to succeed? PISA in focus*. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar - 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 - Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). Solving the problem of powerful instruction. In C. Csikos, A. Rausch, & J. Szitanyi (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the 40th Conference of the international Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education*(Vol. 1, pp. 3–18). Szeged: PME.Google Scholar - Schroeder, T. L., & Lester, F. K. (1989). Developing understanding in mathematics via problem solving. In P. R. Trafton & A. P. Shulte (Eds.),
*New directions for elementary school mathematics*(pp. 31–42). Reston: NCTM.Google Scholar - Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding.
*Mathematics Teaching, 77*, 20–26.Google Scholar - Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2011).
*5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematical discussions*. Reston: National Council of Teacher of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason: an analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project.
*Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 2*(1), 50–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M., & Silver, E. (2009).
*Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: a casebook for professional development*(2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar - Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998).
*Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory*. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.Google Scholar - Sullivan, P., & Davidson, A. (2014). The role of challenging mathematical tasks in creating opportunities for student reasoning, 2014. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.),
*Curriculum in focus: Research guided practice. Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia*(pp. 605–612). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar - Sullivan, P., Clarke, D. M., Clarke, B., & O'Shea, H. (2009a). Exploring the relationship between task, teacher actions, and student learning.
*PNA, 4*(4), 133–142.Google Scholar - Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Jorgensen, R. (2009b). Tasks and pedagogies that facilitate mathematical problem solving. In B. Kaur, M. Kapur, & K. Berinderjeet (Eds.),
*Yearbook of the Association of Mathematics Educators*(pp. 17–42). London: AME and World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar - Sullivan, P., Clarke, D., & Clarke, B. (2013).
*Teaching with tasks for effective mathematics learning*. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sullivan, P., Clarke, D., Cheeseman, J., Mornane, A., Roche, A., Sawatzki, C., & Walker, N. (2014). Students’ willingness to engage with mathematical challenges: Implications for classroom pedagogies. In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh, & A. Prescott (Eds.),
*Curriculum in focus: Research guided practice. (Proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia)*(pp. 597–604). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar - Sullivan, P., Askew, M., Cheeseman, J., Clarke, D., Mornane, A., Roche, A., & Walker, N. (2015). Supporting teachers in structuring mathematics lessons involving challenging tasks.
*Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education., 18*, 123–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-014-9279-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sullivan, P., Walker, N., Borcek, C., & Rennie, M. (2016). Exploring a structure for mathematics lessons that initiate learning by activating cognition on challenging tasks.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior*, 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.12.002. - van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. E. (2006).
*Educational design research*. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Watson, A., & Sullivan, P. (2008). Teachers learning about tasks and lessons. In D. Tirosh & T. Wood (Eds.),
*Tools and resources in mathematics teacher education*(pp. 109–135). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar