Commentary on Part III

  • John MasonEmail author
Part of the Advances in Mathematics Education book series (AME)


Using parts of a structural approach developed by Bennett (1966, 1970) for understanding complex situations, traditional and visionary approaches to teaching algebra are compared and contrasted, informed by the chapters in this part. In particular, a four-term structure for activity is used to consider how a transition from traditional to visionary might be engineered on a global scale. This reveals some vital topics for further research. It is conjectured that a core stumbling block is the increasingly prevalent desire to be ‘told what to do’ rather than to appreciate structurally what makes different actions applicable in different situations.


Mathematics Education Prospective Teacher Word Problem Goal State Mathematical Thinking 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ainley, J., & Pratt, D. (2002). Purpose and utility in pedagogic task design. In A. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 17–24). Norwich, UK: PME. Google Scholar
  2. Beatty, R. (2010). Pattern rules, patterns and graphs: Analyzing grade 6 students’ learning of linear functions though the processes of webbing, situated abstraction, and convergent change. Unpublished PhD thesis. Toronto: OISE. Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (1966). The Dramatic Universe: Man and His Nature (Vol. 3). London: Hodder & Stoughton. Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, J. (1970). Elementary Systematics: A Tool for Understanding Wholes. Sherborne: Coombe Springs Press. Google Scholar
  5. Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing School Mathematics (revised and expanded edition). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  6. Boero, P. (2001). Transformation and anticipation as key processes in algebraic problem solving. In R. Sutherland (Ed.), Algebraic Processes and Structures (pp. 99–119). Kluwer: Dordrecht. Google Scholar
  7. Brousseau, G. (1984). The crucial role of the didactical contract in the analysis and construction of situations in teaching and learning mathematics. In H. Steiner (Ed.), Theory of Mathematics Education, Paper 54 (pp. 110–119). Institut fur Didaktik der Mathematik der Universitat Bielefeld. Google Scholar
  8. Brousseau, G. (1997). (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield, Trans.) Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics: Didactiques des Mathématiques, 1970–1990. Kluwer: Dordrecht. Google Scholar
  9. Carpenter, T., & Fennema, E. (1999). Childrens’ Mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction. Portsmouth: Heineman. Google Scholar
  10. Carpenter, T., Franke, M., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking Mathematically. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Google Scholar
  11. Carraher, D., & Schliemann, A. (2007). Early algebra and algebraic reasoning. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 669–705). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  12. Carraher, D., Schliemann, A., Brizuela, B., & Earnest, D. (2006). Arithmetic and algebra in early mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37(2), 87–115. Google Scholar
  13. Carraher, D., Schliemann, A., & Schwartz, J. (2007). Early algebra is not the same as algebra early. In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the Early Grades (pp. 235–272). Mahwah: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  14. Clements, M., & Ellerton, N. (2009). A model for improving prospective mathematics teachers’ algebra content knowledge. Brunei International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1(1), 68–84. Google Scholar
  15. Davidov, V. (1972/1990). (J. Teller, Trans.) Types of Generalization in Instruction: Logical and Psychological Prelims in the Structuring of School Curricula. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  16. Davis, B., Summara, D., & Simmt, E. (2006). Complexity & Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching and Research. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  17. Dougherty, B., & Slovin, H. (2004). Generalized diagrams as a tool for young children’s problem solving. In M. Høines & A.-B. Fuglestad (Eds.), The 28th International Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Bergen: Bergen University College. Google Scholar
  18. Dürr, C. (1985). Vorschläge für intensives Arbeiten mit Variablen im Mathematikunterricht der unteren Schuljahre (Suggestions for intensive working with variables in mathematics lessons of the lower years). Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin / Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Reihe, 34(7), 615–623. Google Scholar
  19. Dweck, C. (2000). Self-Theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality and Development. Philadelphia: Psychology Press. Google Scholar
  20. Gardner, H. (1985). The Mind’s New Science: A History of the Cognitive Revolution. New York: Basic. Google Scholar
  21. Gattegno, C. (1970). What We Owe Children: The Subordination of Teaching to Learning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Google Scholar
  22. Gattegno, C. (1973). In the Beginning There Were No Words: The Universe of Babies. New York: Educational Solutions. Google Scholar
  23. Gattegno, C. (1975). The Mind Teaches the Brain. New York: Educational Solutions. Google Scholar
  24. Gattegno, C. (1987). The Science of Education Part I: Theoretical Considerations. New York: Educational Solutions. Google Scholar
  25. Gerhard, S. (2009). Problem solving without numbers. In Proceedings of the Sixth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 499–508). C.E.R.M.E. Google Scholar
  26. Gerofsky, S. (1996). A linguistic and narrative view of word problems in mathematics education. For The Learning of Mathematics, 16(2), 36–45. Google Scholar
  27. Gillings, R. (1972 reprinted 1982). Mathematics in the Time of the Pharaohs. New York: Dover. Google Scholar
  28. Gravemeijer, K. (1994). Developing Realistic Mathematics Education. Culenborg: Technipress. Google Scholar
  29. Greeno, J. (1994). Gibson’s affordances. Psychological Review, 101(2), 336–342. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hanson, N. (1958). Patterns of Discovery: An Enquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  31. Hewitt, D. (1998). Approaching arithmetic algebraically. Mathematics Teaching, 163, 19–29. Google Scholar
  32. James, W. (1890 reprinted 1950). Principles of Psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Dover. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kieran, C. (2007). Learning and teaching algebra at the middle-school through college levels: Building meaning for symbols and their manipulation (A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics). In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 707–762). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Google Scholar
  34. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and Awareness. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  35. Marton, F., & Pang, M. (2006). On some necessary conditions of Learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193–220. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Maslow, A. (1971). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York: Viking Press. Google Scholar
  37. Mason, J. (2001). On the use and abuse of word problems for moving from arithmetic to algebra. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.), The Future of the Teaching and Learning of Algebra, Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference (pp. 430–437). Melbourne: University of Melbourne. Google Scholar
  38. Mason, J. (2008). Making use of children’s powers to produce algebraic thinking. In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the Early Grades (pp. 57–94). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  39. Mason, J., Graham, A., Pimm, D., & Gowar, N. (1985). Routes to, Roots of Algebra. Milton Keynes: The Open University. Google Scholar
  40. Mason, J., Johnston-Wilder, S., & Graham, A. (2005). Developing Thinking in Algebra. London: Sage (Paul Chapman). Google Scholar
  41. Mason, J., Stephens, M., & Watson, A. (2009). Appreciating mathematical structure for all. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21(2), 10–32. Google Scholar
  42. Maturana, H. (1988). Reality: The search for objectivity or the quest for a compelling argument. Irish Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 25–82. Google Scholar
  43. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1972). Autopoesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Reidel: Dordrecht. Google Scholar
  44. Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1988). The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: Shambala. Google Scholar
  45. Merton, R. (1965). On the Shoulders of Giants: A Shandean Postscript. New York: Free Press. Google Scholar
  46. Molina, M., & Mason, J. (2009). Justifications-on-demand as a device to promote shifts of attention associated with relational thinking in elementary arithmetic. Canadian Journal for Science Mathematics and Technology Education, 9(4), 224–242. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moses, R. P., & Cobb, C. (2001). Organizing algebra: The need to voice a demand. Social Policy, 31(4), 4–12. Google Scholar
  48. Moss, J. (2002). Percents and proportion at the center: Altering the teaching sequence for rational number. In B. Littweiller (Ed.), Making Sense of Fractions, Ratios, and Proportions (pp. 109–120). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  49. Moss, J., & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building in mathematics: Supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 441–465. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Moss, J. (2005). Pipes, tubes, and beakers: Teaching rational number. In J. Bransford & S. Donovan (Eds.), How Children Learn: History Science and Mathematics in the Classroom. Washington: National Academy Press. Google Scholar
  51. Newton, I. (1707). Arithmetica Universalis (Ed. William Whiston). Cambridge. Google Scholar
  52. Open University (1984). EM235: Developing Mathematical Thinking. Milton Keynes: Open University. Google Scholar
  53. Papic, M. (2007). Mathematical patterning in early childhood: an intervention study. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Sydney: Macquarie University. Google Scholar
  54. Piaget, J., Inhelder, B., & Szeminska, A. (1960). The Child’s Conception of Geometry (E. A. Lunzer, Trans). New York: Basic. Google Scholar
  55. Recorde, R. (1543). The Ground of Arts: Teaching the Perfect Worke and Practise of Arithmeticke, Both in Whole Numbers and Fractions. London: Harper, Thomas. Reprinted by New York: Da Capo Press, 1969. Google Scholar
  56. Rumi, J. (1999). C. Barks (Trans.) The Essential Rumi. London: Penguin. Google Scholar
  57. Sawyer, W. (1959). A Concrete Approach to Abstract Algebra. London: Freeman. Google Scholar
  58. Schliemann, A., Carraher, D., & Brizuela, B. (2007). Bringing Out the Algebraic Character of Arithmetic: From Children’s Ideas to Classroom Practice. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar
  59. Schmittau, J. (2003). Cultural historical theory and mathematics education. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, S. Miller, & V. Ageyev (Eds.), Vygotsky’s Educational Theory in Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
  60. Schmittau, J. (2005). The development of algebraic thinking: A Vygotskian perspective. Zentralblatt Fuer Didaktik Der Mathematik (International Review of Mathematics Education), 37(1), 16–22. Google Scholar
  61. Stein, M., Grover, B., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455–488. Google Scholar
  62. Tahta, D. (1972). A Boolean Anthology: Selected Writings of Mary Boole on Mathematics Education. Derby: Association of Teachers of Mathematics. Google Scholar
  63. Vergnaud, G. (1981). Quelques orientations théoriques et méthodologiques des recherches françaises en didactique des mathématiques. In Actes du Vième Colloque de PME (Vol. 2, pp. 7–17). Grenoble: Edition IMAG. Google Scholar
  64. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & de Corte, E. (2000). Making Sense of Word Problems. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. Google Scholar
  65. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of the Higher Psychological Processes. London: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  66. Ward, J. (1706). The Young Mathematicians Guide, Being a Plain and Easie Introduction to the Mathematics in Five Parts…. London. Google Scholar
  67. Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2002). Student-generated examples in the learning of mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(2), 237–249. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2005). Mathematics as a Constructive Activity: Learners Generating Examples. Mahwah: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  69. Whiteside, D. (Ed.) (1972). The Mathematical Papers of Isaac Newton (Vol. V, pp. 1683–1684). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  2. 2.University of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations