Abstract
The dominant focus on generalizing in the development of algebraic thinking has to a large extent obscured the process of seeing structure . While generalization-oriented activity remains highly important in algebra and early algebra, and in fact includes a structural component, equal attention needs to be paid to the complementary process of looking through mathematical objects and to decomposing and recomposing them in various structural ways. With the aim of instigating greater attention to structure and elaborating more widely on its meaning with respect to developing early algebraic thinking , this chapter explores the notion of structure and structural activity from various perspectives, and then presents a research-based example of 12-year-olds seeking structure within an activity involving factors, multiples, and divisors.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arcavi, A., Drijvers, P., & Stacey, K. (2017). The learning and teaching of algebra: Ideas, insights, and activities. London: Routledge.
Artigue, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: The genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7, 245–274.
Asghari, A. H., & Khosroshahi, L. G. (2016). Making associativity operational. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. doi:10.1007/s10763-016-9759-1.
Baek, J. M. (2008). Developing algebraic thinking through explorations in multiplication. In C. E. Greenes & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Algebra and algebraic thinking in school mathematics (70th Yearbook of NCTM, pp. 141–154). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Bass, H. B., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Foreword. In T. P. Carpenter, M. L. Franke, & L. Levi, Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school (pp. v–vii). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Blanton, M. L., & Kaput, J. J. (2004). Elementary grade students’ capacity for functional thinking. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 135–142). Bergen, NO: PME.
Blanton, M., Levi, L., Crites, T., & Dougherty, B. J. (2011). Developing essential understanding of algebraic thinking for teaching mathematics in grades 3–5. In B. J. Dougherty & R. M. Zbiek (Eds.), Essential understandings series. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Blanton, M., Brizuela, B. M., Gardiner, A. M., Sawrey, K., & Newman-Owens, A. (2015). A learning trajectory in 6-year-olds’ thinking about generalizing functional relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46, 511–558.
Britt, M. S., & Irwin, K. C. (2011). Algebraic thinking with and without algebraic representation: A pathway for learning. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 137–159). New York: Springer.
Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Carraher, D. W., Schliemann, A. D., Brizuela, B. M., & Earnest, D. (2006). Arithmetic and algebra in early mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(2), 87–115.
Carraher, D. W., Martinez, M. V., & Schliemann, A. D. (2008). Early algebra and mathematical generalization. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 3–22.
Cedillo, T., & Kieran, C. (2003). Initiating students into algebra with symbol-manipulating calculators. In J. T. Fey et al. (Eds.), Computer algebra systems in secondary school mathematics education (pp. 219–239). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Collis, K. F. (1975). The development of formal reasoning. Newcastle, AU: University of Newcastle.
Cooper, T. J., & Warren, E. (2011). Years 2 to 6 students’ ability to generalise: Models, representations and theory for teaching and learning. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 187–214). New York: Springer.
Demby, A. (1997). Algebraic procedures used by 13- to 15-year-olds. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 45–70.
Ellemor-Collins, D., & Wright, R. (2009). Structuring numbers 1 to 20: Developing facile addition and subtraction. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21(2), 50–75.
Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Dordrecht, NL: Reidel.
Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic.
Fujii, T., & Stephens, M. (2001). Fostering an understanding of algebraic generalisation through numerical expressions: The role of quasi-variables. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference: The Future of the Teaching and Learning of Algebra (pp. 258–264). Melbourne, AU: The University of Melbourne.
Guzmán, J., Kieran, C., & Martínez, C. (2010). The role of Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) and a task on the simplification of rational expressions designed with a technical-theoretical approach. In P. Brosnan, D. B. Erchick, & L. Flevares (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32 nd PME-NA Conference (Vol. VI, pp. 1497–1505). Columbus, OH: PME-NA. http://www.pmena.org/pmenaproceedings/PMENA%2032%202010%20Proceedings.pdf. Accessed: 30 December 2016.
Hewitt, D. (1998). Approaching arithmetic algebraically. Mathematics Teaching, 163, 19–29.
Hoch, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2004). Structure sense in high school algebra: The effect of brackets. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of 28 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 49–56). Bergen, NO: PME.
Hoch, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2005). Students’ difficulties with applying a familiar formula in an unfamiliar context. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of 29 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 145–152). Melbourne, AU: PME.
Hoch, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2006). Structure sense versus manipulation skills: An unexpected result. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of 30 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 305–312). Prague, CZ: PME.
Jones, I., Inglis, M., Gilmore, C., & Dowens, M. (2012). Substitution and sameness: Two components of a relational conception of the equals sign. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113, 166–176.
Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 5–17). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kieran, C. (1989). The early learning of algebra: A structural perspective. In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 33–56). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
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.
Kieran, C, (2006a). Research on the learning and teaching of algebra. In A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 11–49). Rotterdam, NL: Sense.
Kieran, C. (2006b). A response to ‘algebraic thinking and the generalization of patterns.’ In S. Alatorre, J. L. Cortina, M. Sáiz, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Plenary Lecture, Vol. 1, pp. 22–29). Mérida, MX: PME-NA.
Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching algebra at the middle school through college levels: Building meaning for symbols and their manipulation. In F. K. Lester, Jr., (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 707–762). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Kieran, C., & Guzmán, J. (2005). Five steps to zero: Students developing elementary number theory concepts when using calculators. In Wm. J. Masalski (Ed.), Technology-supported mathematics learning environments (67th Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 35–50). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Kieran, C., Pang, J. S., Schifter, D., & Ng, S. F. (2016). Early algebra: Research into its nature, its learning, its teaching. New York: Springer Open eBooks. http://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319322575. Accessed: 30 December 2016.
Kirshner, D. (2001). The structural algebra option revisited. In R. Sutherland, T. Rojano, A. Bell, & R. Lins (Eds.), Perspectives on school algebra (pp. 83–98). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic.
Kuntze, S., Lerman, S., Murphy, B., Kurz-Milcke, E., Siller, H.-S., & Winbourne, P. (2011). Development of pre-service teachers’ knowledge related to big ideas in mathematics. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of 35 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 105–112). Ankara, TR: PME.
Lagrange, J.-b. (2000). L’intégration d’instruments informatiques dans l’enseignement: Une approche par les techniques [The integration of digital tools in teaching: A technique-based approach]. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43, 1–30.
Linchevski, L., & Livneh, D. (1999). Structure sense: the relationship between algebraic and numerical contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40, 173–196.
Malara, N. A., & Navarra, G. (2016). Epistemological issues in early algebra: Offering teachers new words and paradigms to promote pupils’ algebraic thinking. Invited panel presentation at Topic Study Group 10 of 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME13), Hamburg, Germany.
Mason, J. (1996). Expressing generality and roots of algebra. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.), Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching (pp. 65–86). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
Mason, J. (2016). How early is too early for thinking algebraically? Invited panel presentation at Topic Study Group 10 of 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME13), Hamburg, Germany.
Mason, J. (2017). Overcoming the algebra barrier: Being particular about the general, and generally looking beyond the particular, in homage to Mary Boole. In S. Stewart (Ed.), And the rest is just algebra (pp. 97–117). New York: Springer.
Mason, J., Graham, A., Pimm, D., & Gowar, N. (1985). Routes to, roots of algebra. Milton Keynes, UK: The Open University Press.
Mason, J., with Graham, A., & Johnston-Wilder, S. (2005). Developing thinking in algebra. London: Sage.
Mason, J., Stephens, M., & Watson, A. (2009). Appreciating mathematics structure for all. Mathematics Education Research Journal 21(2), 10–32.
Mason, J., with Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (2010). Thinking mathematically (2nd edition). London, UK: Pearson.
Morris, A. (1999). Developing concepts of mathematical structure: Pre-arithmetic reasoning versus extended arithmetic reasoning. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 21(1), 44–67.
Moss, J., & London McNab, S. (2011). An approach to geometric and numeric patterning that fosters second grade students’ reasoning and generalizing about functions and co-variation. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 277–301). New York: Springer.
Moss, J., Beatty, R., Barkin, S., & Shillolo, G. (2008). “What is your theory? What is your rule?” Fourth graders build an understanding of functions through patterns and generalizing problems. In C. E. Greenes & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Algebra and algebraic thinking in school mathematics (70th Yearbook of National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 155–168). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Neagoy, M. (2015). Planting the seeds of algebra: Explorations for the upper elementary grades. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Radford, L. (2010). The eye as a theoretician: Seeing structures in generalizing activities. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30(2), 2–7.
Radford, L. (2011). Embodiment, perception and symbols in the development of early algebraic thinking. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35 th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 17–24). Ankara, TR: PME.
Radford, L. (2012). Early algebraic thinking: Epistemological, semiotic, and developmental issues. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), The Proceedings of the 12 th International Congress on Mathematical Education: Intellectual and Attitudinal Challenges (Awardee lecture, pp. 209–227). New York: Springer Open eBooks. http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783319106854. Accessed: 30 December 2016.
Rivera, F. (2013). Teaching and learning patterns in school mathematics: Psychological and pedagogical considerations. New York: Springer.
Rivera, F. D., & Becker, J. R. (2011). Formation of pattern generalization involving linear figural patterns among middle school students: Results of a three-year study. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 323–366). New York: Springer.
Russell, S. J., Schifter, D., & Bastable, V. (2011). Developing algebraic thinking in the context of arithmetic. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 43–69). New York: Springer.
Schwarzkopf, R. (2015). Design science between normative and descriptive approaches. In M. Nührenbörger et al. (Eds.), Design science and its importance in the German mathematics educational discussion (pp. 10–18). New York: Springer Open.
Slavit, D. (1999). The role of operation sense in transitions from arithmetic to algebra thought. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37, 251–274.
Subramaniam, K., & Banerjee, R. (2011). The arithmetic-algebra connection: A historical-pedagogical perspective. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 87–107). New York: Springer.
Vergnaud, G. (1988). Multiplicative structures. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Ed.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (Research Agenda for Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, pp. 141–161). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Warren, E. (2003). The role of arithmetic structure in the transition from arithmetic to algebra. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(2), 122–137.
Warren, E., Trigueros, M., & Ursini, S. (2016). Research on the learning and teaching of algebra. In A. Gutiérrez, G. C. Leder, & P. Boero (Eds.), The second handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: The journey continues (pp. 73–108). Rotterdam, NL: Sense.
Williams, D., & Stephens, M. (1992). Activity 1: Five steps to zero. In J. T. Fey (Ed.), Calculators in mathematics education (Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 233–234). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Wittmann, E. Ch. (2016). Organizing a systemic relationship between reflective researchers and reflective practitioners. Paper presented at ICME-13 within the Thematic Afternoon on the German Didactic Tradition, Hamburg, Germany.
Zazkis, R., & Campbell, S. (1996). Divisibility and multiplicative structure of natural numbers: Preservice teachers’ understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 540–563.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kieran, C. (2018). Seeking, Using, and Expressing Structure in Numbers and Numerical Operations: A Fundamental Path to Developing Early Algebraic Thinking. In: Kieran, C. (eds) Teaching and Learning Algebraic Thinking with 5- to 12-Year-Olds. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68351-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68351-5_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68350-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68351-5
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)