Low levels of learner performance in Mathematics in the Senior Phase (Grades 7-9) in South Africa is often attributed to insufficient mathematics content knowledge among teachers. Although this view might be justifiable, it is often incorrect to assume that content knowledge alone will solve the problem of low performance in mathematics. This study, therefore, argues that understanding learner misconceptions and/or errors and their underlying intricacies could provide the basis for instructional decision making, subsequently improved performance in mathematics. The purpose of the study was to explore the implications of teachers’ understanding of learner errors for mathematics learning. The study was guided by qualitative methods using a case study design which involved data collection from two schools, followed by in-depth data analysis. Two theoretical lenses, namely, Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI) and Constructivist theory were used to explore the main research question: What are the implications of the teachers’ understanding of learner errors on the learning of school mathematics in the Senior Phase (specifically Grade 9)? Data was collected through lesson observations, analysis of learners’ test responses and interviews. The findings revealed that teachers’ understanding of learner errors from written responses differed notably from intricacies of same errors emanating from interviewing the learners as well as the same errors analysed by the researcher. The implications of these findings suggest the likelihood of a mismatch between teachers’ instructional decision making and learner misconception/errors and this may hamper effective learning of mathematics. / Dissertation (MEd)--University of Pretoria, 2020. / Science, Mathematics and Technology Education / MEd / Unrestricted

Specialundervisning och nivågruppering i matematik har inte så stor effekt (Bentley & Bentley, 2011; Giota & Emanuelsson, 2011) och vår skollag (2010:800) gör gällande att undervisningen ska ske inom klassens ram. Med detta som utgångspunkt designades denna studie. Studien genomfördes med 21 elever i år två under nitton lektioner. Syftet var att se om intensivundervisning med hjälp av strukturerad undervisning kan ge effekt på elevernas automatisering av additions och subtraktionstabellerna inom talområde 0-20. Studien genomfördes som en experimentell design med fältexperiment och metoderna i studien var deltagande observation, fältanteckningar och diagnoser.  Observationerna och fältanteckningarna visar ett exempel på hur strukturerad intensivundervisning kan planeras och diagnosernas resultat indikerar på att strukturerad intensivundervisning i aritmetik med ett inkluderande perspektiv har positiv effekt på elevernas automatisering. / Special education and abilitygrouping in mathematics have not shown a great effect (Bentley & Bentley, 2011; Giota & Emanuelsson, 2011) and our Education Act (2010:800) argues that students should be taught in the frame of the class. The study was based on this knowledge, which was conducted with 21 students in their second year for nineteen lessons. The aim was to see if intensive teaching has any effect on students´ procedural fluency of counting addition and subtraction within the numberrange 0-20. The study was conducted as an experimental design of fieldexperiments and the methods in the study were participant observation, fieldnotes and diagnoses. The observation and the fieldnotes show an example of how structured intensive teaching can be planned and the results of the diagnoses indicate that structured intensive teaching in aritmetic in an inclusive perspective has a positive effect on students´ procedural fluency.

During the last several decades, mathematics reform has emphasized the goal of ensuring that students develop both conceptual and procedural understanding in mathematics. The current mathematics reform, Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers [NGA Center & CCSSO], 2010), promotes this goal, with procedural knowledge building upon a strong conceptual base. This study uses content analysis to investigate the extent and ways in which Houghton Mifflin Harcourts Go Math! K-8 (HMH, 2016) supports teachers in building procedural fluency from conceptual understanding when teaching equivalence of fractions.Krippendorfs (1980) framework for content analysis guided this study. I identified a priori codes, and allowed for emergent codes, that characterize quality mathematical instruction. Careful analysis of the teacher editions of the textbook series revealed that, if the teacher instructions are to be followed with fidelity, students are not given opportunities to create and share their own strategies for solving tasks designed to help them learn equivalence of fractions. Neither are they given opportunities to make connections among strategies. All connections are introduced by the teacher. Although the teacher editions promote transitions from visual models to algorithms, they provide inconsistent use of problem-solving practice tasks and equal-sharing problems, two methods that are strongly supported by the research literature for developing procedural fluency from conceptual understanding in equivalence of fractions. Finally, the teacher materials include multiple instances in which the same or similar language and terms are used for mathematical and pedagogical practices found in mainstream research and professional literature, yet the practices were to be implemented in ways contrary to mainstream interpretations.Overall, Go Math! K-8 (HMH, 2016) provided little support to teachers in helping students build procedural fluency from conceptual understanding. A teacher-driven, rather than student-driven, approach to instruction was emphasized, thus minimizing opportunities for students to engage in the kinds of tasks and discourse recommended in the literature. The ways in which mathematical language and terms were implemented contrary to mainstream research interpretations can easily cause confusion among educators. The dearth of authentic problem-solving practice was inconsistent with quality mathematics instruction that supports students conceptual and procedural understanding.

This multiple-case study examines the explicit and implicit assumptions of six veteran calculus instructors from three types of educational institutions, comparing and contrasting their views on the iteration of conceptual understanding and procedural fluency of pre-calculus topics. There were three components to the research data recording process. The first component was a written survey, the second component was a "think-aloud" activity of the instructors analyzing the results of a function diagnostic instrument administered to a calculus class, and for the third component, the instructors responded to two quotations. As a result of this activity, themes were found between and among instructors at the three types of educational institutions related to their expectations of their incoming students’ prior knowledge of pre-calculus topics related to functions. Differences between instructors of the three types of educational institutions included two identifiable areas: (1) the teachers’ expectations of their incoming students and (2) the methods for planning instruction. In spite of these differences, the veteran instructors were in agreement with other studies’ findings that an iterative approach to conceptual understanding and procedural fluency are necessary for student understanding of pre-calculus concepts.

Teaching students with Intellectual Disability (ID) is a relatively new endeavor. Beginning in 2001 with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, the general education curriculum integrated algebra across the K-12 curriculum (Kendall, 2011; National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010), and expansion of the curriculum included five intertwined skills (productive disposition, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive reasoning, and conceptual understanding) (Kilpatrick, Swafford, & Findell, 2001). Researchers are just beginning to explore the potential of students with ID with algebra (Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Harris & Wakeman, 2008; Creech-Galloway, Collins, Knight, & Bausch, 2013; Courtade, Spooner, Browder, & Jimenez, 2012; Göransson, Hellblom-Thibblin, & Axdorph, 2016). Most of the research examines the development of procedural fluency (Göransson et al., 2016) and few researchers have explored high school level skills. Using a single-case multiple-baseline across participants design, the study proposes to teach two algebra skills to six high school students with ID, creating an equation (y=mx+b) from a graph of a line and creating a graph from an equation. The six high school students with ID will be recruited from a school district in central Virginia. The intervention package modeled after Jimenez, Browder, and Courtade (2008), included modeling, templates, time delay prompting, and a task analysis. Results showed that all six individuals improved performance during intervention for the target skills over baseline; results also indicated that in three out of the six cases some generalization to the inverse skill occurred without supplemental intervention. The ability of individuals with ID to generalize the learning without intervention provides some evidence that individuals with ID are developing conceptual understanding while learning procedural fluency.