Abstract
This chapter explains the ways that open-ended tasks might contribute to learning, it gives the details of a specific open-ended task and how it might be used in a “lesson”, it indicates the challenges that teachers may experience when using such tasks, it presents a range of examples of this type of task to illustrate the scope and nature of the tasks, and it summarises some research on teachers’ reactions to the tasks. The fundamental argument is that such tasks are accessible by students, able to be used readily by teachers, foster a range of mathematical actions, and contribute to some of the important goals of learning mathematics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Boaler, J. (2008). Promoting 'relational equity' and high mathematics achievement through an innovative mixed ability approach. British Educational Research Journal, 34(2), 167–194.
Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson, & M. Otte (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematics education (pp. 243–307). The Netherlands: Reidel.
Desforges, C., & Cockburn, A. (1987). Understanding the mathematics teacher: A study of practice in first schools. London: The Falmer Press.
Leung, S. S. (1998). On the open-ended nature of mathematical problem solving. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Use of open-ended problems in mathematics classrooms (pp. 26–35). Helsinki: Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki.
Middleton, J. A. (1995). A study of intrinsic motivation in the mathematics classroom: A personal construct approach. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(3), 254–279.
Staples, M. E. (2008). Promoting student collaboration in a detracked, heterogeneous secondary mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 349–371.
Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10, 313–340.
Stein, M. K., & Lane, S. (1996). Instructional tasks and the development of student capacity to think and reason and analysis of the relationship between teaching and learning in a reform mathematics project. Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 50–80.
Sullivan, P. (1999). Seeking a rationale for particular classroom tasks and activities. In J. M. Truran & K. N. Truran (Eds.) Making the difference **(Proceedings of the 21st annual conference of the Mathematics Educational Research Group of Australasia, pp. 15–29). Adelaide: MERGA.
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.
Wiliam, D. (1998, July). Open beginnings and open ends. Paper distributed at the Open-Ended Questions Discussion Group, International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Stellenbosch, South Africa.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sullivan, P., Clarke, D., Clarke, B. (2013). Using Content-Specific Open-Ended Tasks. In: Teaching with Tasks for Effective Mathematics Learning. Mathematics Teacher Education, vol 104. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4681-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4681-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4680-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4681-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)