The
field of mathematics education research has well documented elementary
students' and teachers' difficulty with rational numbers and fractions (e.g.
Armstrong & Bezuk, 1995; Mack, 1998; Meagher, 2002; Moss & Case, 1999;
Tirosh, 2000). Several studies have examined elementary children's
understanding of fractions and fair sharing. For example, Empson, Junk,
Dominguez, and Turner (2006) examined students' sharing strategies in first,
third, fourth, and fifth grades and found two major categories of spontaneous
strategies. Charles & Nason (2000) interviewed a small group of third
grade students and described four classes of strategies. Kouba (1989) examined
first grade students' strategies when solving two types of partitive division
tasks as part of a larger study of multiplication and division. In all,
studies demonstrate a greater level of abstraction in dealing with fractional
amounts with increasing age. In contrast to this body of work, only a handful
of studies have examined how preschool and early elementary
school children solve fraction and fair sharing problems (Empson, 1999; 2003;
Hunting & Davis, 1991; Miller, 1984; Pothier & Sawada, 1983; Wing &
Beal, 2004).
We examined young
children's naïve understanding of the division of quantities, and differences
in strategies for solving fractional problems between pre-K3, pre-K4 and K
children prior to formal instruction. We investigated the following research
questions: (1) In what ways do young children demonstrate their fractional
understanding, specifically mixed fractions, by means of verbally presented
fair sharing tasks? (2) How and in what ways do children's visual
representations and oral descriptions differ across pre-school and Kindergarten
age groups?
Although previous
studies have attempted to elucidate individual students' processes in learning
to comprehend fraction tasks at young ages, these studies have tended to
involve small numbers of students Kindergarten age and up, and approach the
problem from a nonsystematic framework (Empson, 1999, 2003; Hunting &
Davis, 1991; Pothier & Sawada, 1983). Other work has begun to examine the
social activities of sharing as these build on young children's informal
knowledge (Empson, 1995; Kieren, 1992; Lamon, 1996; Mack, 1993; Piaget et al,
1960; Smith 2002; Streefland, 1993; Vergnaud, 1983). However, we are
concerned with the way in which very young students', ages three to six, and
their informal understandings of fair sharing can support and lead students'
thinking about fractional concepts and partitioning.
Thirty-six pre-school
and Kindergarten children ranging from 3 years, 8 months to 6 years, 6 months
participated in this study (17 females and 19 boys). All of the students
attended a private Montessori school. Each student was interviewed,
quantitatively and qualitatively assessed, and video recorded by the principal
author. All seven of the fraction items in this study were framed socially;
that is in the context of sharing items with friends. The first two items
presented the possibility for one-to-one correspondence, with 1) three objects
and three friends, and 2) six objects and three friends. The next four items
presented situations containing more objects than friends (e.g. 5 oranges and 3
friends), resulting in a mixed number or improper fraction as the correct
answer. The final question presented the students with two objects to be
shared fairly among six friends (See Table 1).
Concept Investigated 1 Amanda wanted to share 3 muffins with her 3 friends. How can she do this fairly? 1-to-1 correspondence 2 Chris wanted to share 6 crackers with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? Distributing 2 wholes · count by 2s · count by 1 3 Jade wanted to share 6 carrot sticks with her 4 friends. How can she do this fairly? Distribution of wholes · Dividing into half · Dividing into fourths 4 Eric wanted to share 7 cookies with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? Distribution of wholes · Distribute 2 each · Dividing into thirds 5 Sam wanted to share 5 oranges with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? Distribution of wholes · 2 remain · Dividing into halfs · Dividing into thirds 6 Matthew wanted to share 7 pretzel rods with his 4 friends. How can he do this fairly? Distribution of wholes · 3 remain · Dividing half, fourths · Dividing into fourths · Dividing into ¾ 7 Emily wanted to share 2 granola bars with her 6 friends. How can she do this fairly? Less items than friends · Dividing into thirds · Dividing into sixths Table 1: Core of oral assessment protocol. Using
grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967), we examined the entire data set
to determine emergent themes and strategies across students and items. Both
students' verbal and written responses were considered together when coding
each response. Each item was coded as correct or incorrect, in other words, as
a fair or unfair distribution of the snack. And in addition, the type of
strategy the student used was also described. Examples of each strategy
including a student's written work and the accompanying transcript that
exemplifies each strategy are provided in Table 2. Table 3 presents the number
of children exhibiting each of the strategies described for each of the tasks
presented in this study, as a function of age group. Table 4 depicts a
progression of children's problem solving skills with task 3 as they mature.
In
order to determine whether age-related differences in performance were
significant, a number of chi-square cross-tabulation tests were performed on
the number of children (or frequency of strategies used) in each age group,
separately for each task. Only the strategies for which there were cell counts
for at least one age group for that task were included in the analysis for that
particular task. Although the results must be interpreted with caution given
the small data set, and the small frequencies within some cells, these tests
are the most appropriate for providing statistical verification of what can be
seen visually when examining Table 3. For all tasks, except for task 1, there
were significant differences in strategies between Pre-K3, Pre- K4 and K
children. Task 1, χ2 (4) = 5.79, p =
.22.; Task 2, χ2 (6) = 32.06, p
<.001; Task 3, χ2 (10) = 18.42, p
= .05; Task 4, χ2 (10) = 29.52, p
= .001; Task 5, χ2 (10) = 35.42, p
<.001 Task 6, χ2 (10) = 32.41, p
<.001 and Task 7, χ2 (6) = 33.02, p
< .001.
Incorrect/Unfair Strategy Student Work Age: Years, Months Transcript Distribute All Wholes but not Fairly 3,11 E: Chris wanted to share 6 crackers with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? C: (Drawing lines) E: How many crackers did each friend get? C: Wee (hitting paper with pencil) E: How many did this friend get? C: One E: How about this friend? C: Two E: How about this friend” C: Three E: Is this fair? C: Yeah. Distribute Wholes but Partition Incorrectly 5,5 E: Sam wanted to share 5 oranges with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? C: Like this . . . (Drawing a line from each face to orange) This one's left, so I can like cut it up (partitions far left orange and then second from left and lines connecting to faces). . . . I'm not sure I can fix that. E: Can you tell me how many oranges each of the friends get? C: I'm not sure. . . . All the lines are all mixed up. Distribute Pieces Only 4,6 E: Emily wanted to share 2 granola bars with her 6 friends. How can she do this fairly? C: (Draws partitions) E: How much does each friend get? C: Then you just cut some more in half and then . . . then they can get some more (drawing lines connecting faces and items). Then they each get three. Distribute Wholes Only 4,6 E: Jade wanted to share 6 carrot sticks with her 4 friends. How can she do this fairly? C: She could just give five to the kids. E: Can you show me how you would do that. C: (Drawing) This one could have this one, this one …. E: So how many did each friend get? C: Ten E: How many are leftover? C: Five Change Task (add items or people to avoid partitioning) 5,4 E: Matthew wanted to share 7 pretzel rods with his 4 friends. How can he do this fairly? C: We can give one to each person. (Adding circles for friends) Now this is enough for everyone. Correct/Fair Strategy Student Work Transcript Distribute Wholes then Economical Partition 5,7 E: Sam wanted to share 5 oranges with his 3 friends. How can he do this fairly? C: Five oranges (drawing 3 lines from friend to orange) and we have two more left. So then we cut this one. And then they would get one whole and two . . . two halves of a third. Distribute Wholes then Extra Partitions 5,6 E: Matthew wanted to share 7 pretzel rods with his 4 friends. How can he do this fairly? C: Ok first I'm gonna give them one whole pretzel rod. There's three left. So I'm gonna cut these into fourths. One, two, three. (drawing partitions). E: So how much does each friend get? C: Three little pieces E: And how much all together? C: Four E: Four what? C: One big pretzel rod and three little pieces. Table 2: Examples of each student
strategy.
Fair Sharing Task Read Aloud
Strategy
Incorrect/Unfair Distribution Correct/Fair Distribution
Task Grade Distribute Distribute Fail to Distribute Distribute Distribute
Wholes Wholes Distribute all Wholes Wholes in
but but Then Then Pieces
not Partition Pieces Distribute Change Economical Extra
Fairly incorrectly only Wholes Only Task Partition Partitions
1 Pre-K3 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 4 7 0
Pre-K4 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 10 3 1
K 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 7 4 0
2 Pre-K3 6 N/A 0 N//A 1 4 0 0
Pre-K4 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 3 11 0
K 0 N/A 1 N/A 0 9 1 0
3 Pre-K3 3 0 1 3 3 0 1 0
Pre-K4 3 0 1 1 1 5 3 0
K 0 0 3 0 0 4 4 0
4 Pre-K3 3 0 1 2 5 0 0 0
Pre-K4 0 7 3 1 1 2 0 0
K 0 5 1 0 0 4 1 0
Strategy
Incorrect/Unfair Distribution Correct/Fair Distribution
Task Grade Distribute Distribute Fail to Distribute Distribute Distribute
Wholes Wholes Distribute all Wholes Wholes in
but but Then Then Pieces
not Partition Pieces Distribute Change Economical Extra
Fairly incorrectly only Wholes Only Task or N/A Partition Partitions
5 Pre-K3 4 1 0 1 5 0 0 0
Pre-K4 2 6 4 1 1 0 0 0
K 0 1 2 2 0 6 0 0
6 Pre-K3 4 2 0 2 3 0 0 0
Pre-K4 4 7 2 0 1 0 0 0
K 0 0 2 1 1 7 0 0
7 Pre-K3 N/A N/A 4 N/A 7 0 0 0 Pre-K4 N/A N/A 12 N/A 1 1 0 0
K N/A N/A 3 N/A 0 2 6 0
Totals 29 29 40 14 30 68 41 1
Table 3: Number of children adopting each strategy as a function of grade level.
Baroody, A. J., & Hume, J. (1991). Meaningful mathematics instruction: The case of fractions. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 54-68.
Bezuk, N. S. & Bieck, M. (1993). Current research on rational numbers and common fractions: Summary and implications for teachers. In D. T. Owens (Ed.), Research ideas for the classroom--Middle grades mathematics (chapter 7, pp. 118 - 136). New York: Macmillan.
Brigham, F. J., Wilson, R., Jones, E., & Moisio, M. (1996). Best practices: Teaching decimals, fractions, and percents to students with learning disabilities. LD Forum, 21, 10-15.
Carpenter, T.P., Ansell, E., Franke, M.L., Fennema, E., and Weisbeck, L. (1993). Models of
problem solving: A study of kindergarten children's problem-solving processes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24, (5), 427-440.
Charles, K. & Nason, R. (2000). Young children's partitioning strategies. Educational studies in
Mathematics, 43, 191-221.
Empson, S. B. (1999). Equal sharing and shared meaning: The development of fraction concepts in a first-grade classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 283-342.
Empson, S.B. (2001). Equal sharing and the roots of fraction equivalance. Teaching Children Mathematics, 7, 421.
Empson, S. B (2003). Low-performing students and teaching fractions for understanding: An interactional analysis.. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 305-343.
Empson, S.B., Junk, D., Higinio, D., & Turner, E. (2005). Fractions as the coordination of
multiplicatively related quantities: A cross-sectional study of children's thinking. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 1-28.
Feigenson, L., Dehaene, S., & Spelke, E. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 307-314.
Hiebert, J. & Wearne, D. (1986). Procedures over concepts: the Acquisition of decimal number knowledge. In. J. Heibert. (Ed.) Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics (pp. 199-223). Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.
Hunting, R. P. (Ed.); Davis, G. E. (Ed.) (1991). Early Fraction Learning. New York, NY, US: Springer-Verlag Publishing.
Kreienkamp, K. (2009). Exemplary project: Math fact memorization in a highly sequenced elementary mathematics curriculum.In: Practical action research: A collection of articles (2nd ed.). Schmuck, Richard A. (Ed.); Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Corwin Press,. pp. 143.
Mack, N. K. (1990). Learning fractions with understanding: Building on informal knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 16-32.
Meagher, M. (2002). Teaching fractions, new methods, new resources. ERIC digest.
Miller, K. (1984). Child as the measure of all things: Measurement procedures and the development of quantitative concepts. In C. Sophian (Ed.) Origins of Cognitive Skills: the Eighteenth Carnegie Symposium on Cognition (pp. 193-228).Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.
Moss, J. & Case, R. (1999). Developing Children's Understanding of the Rational Numbers: A Mew Model and an Experimental Curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 122-47.
Ni, Y. & Zhou, Y. (2005). Teaching and learning fraction and rational numbers: The Origins and implications of whole number bias. Educational Psychologist, 40, 27-52.
Pothier, Y. & Sawada, D. (1983). Partitioning: the Emergence of rational number ideas in young children. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 307-317.
Tirosh, Dina. (2000). Enhancing Prospective Teachers' Knowledge of Children's Conceptions: The Case of Division of Fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 5-25.
Watson, J.M., Campbell, K.J., & Collis, K.F. (1999). The structural development of the concept of fraction by young children. Journ Struct Learn & Intell Systems, 13, 171-193.
Wing, R.E. & Beal, C.R. (1994). Young children's judgments about the relative size of shared portions : The Role of material type. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 1-14.