Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Student in Mathematics Education, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Mathematics Education, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Educational Measuring, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This research examined the construction of algebraic concepts in the 3rd chapter of the 7th-grade mathematics textbook, utilizing Sfard’s and Tall’s theoretical frameworks. Content analysis was employed to achieve the research’s goal of understanding the process by which algebraic concepts are developed in the context of the specified curriculum. This particular research design is considered to be qualitative and focused on the development of educational content, rather than empirical in nature. This study, in terms of its purpose and design, falls under the applied research and non-experimental groups respectively. The chapter in question covers four sections, namely numerical patterns, algebraic expressions, numerical values of algebraic expressions, and equations. This study investigated the process of constructing algebraic concepts, specifically variables and algebraic expressions, utilizing the theoretical frameworks of Sfard and Tall. The research findings suggest that the educational process of algebraic concepts in the textbook tends to follow an accelerated timeline which skips or overlooks the condensation stage (the second stage in the concept development process) and quickly transitions to the reification stage (3rd point in the concept development process). In some instances, the entire condensation stage may even be bypassed, leading to insufficiently developed and understood mathematical concepts and subsequent learning difficulties. Additionally, the research findings are consistent with the theories of concept development proposed by Gray and Tall. Specifically, the construction of the concept has remained at the procedural stage and has not reached the final stage. As such, it is evident that the students have not developed a structural understanding of variables and algebraic expressions.

Keywords

احمدپور، فاطمه و فدائی، محمدرضا و رفیع پور، ابوالفضل. (1396). لزوم بازاندیشی در محتوای کتاب‌های درسی ریاضی پایه هفتم و هشتم از منظر استدلال و اثبات. مطالعات برنامه درسی، 12(46)، 84-59.
دری، محمد مهدی ‏و ‏رفیع پور، ابوالفضل‏و‏دری،‏فاطمه. (1396). ارزیابی ظرفیت کتاب‌های درسی ریاضی دوره متوسطه اول در ترویج یادگیری عمیق مفاهیم. فصلنامه مطالعات برنامه درسی ایران، 14(52)، 1-30.
حیدری، فاطمه الزهرا، اصغری، نسیم. (1398). بررسی درک رویه‌ای و ساختاری دانش‌آموزان دوره متوسطه اول در عبارت‌های جبری، نشریه علمی فناوری آموزش، 13(3)، 671-660.
یافتیان، نرگس و بشیر، آرزو. (1395). تحلیل فصل جبر و معادله کتاب ریاضی پایه هفتم بر اساس پنج الگوی مختلف، نشریه علمی فناوری آموزش، 11(2)، 33-21.
 
 
Bednarz, N, Kieran, C & Lee, Lesley.)1996. (Approaches to Algebra: Perspectives for Research and Teaching. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
Booth, L. R (1984). Algebra: Children's strategies and errors: A report of the strategies and errors in secondary mathematics project. Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.
Collis, K F (1974). "Cognitive development and mathematics learning", paper prepared for Psychology of Mathematics Education Workshop, Centre for Science Education, Chelsea College, London, 28 June
Foster, D. (2007). Making meaning in algebra: Examining students’ understandings and misconceptions. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Assessing mathematical proficiency (pp. 163-176). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gray, E. & Tall, D. (1994). "Duality, Ambiguity, and Flexibility: A "Proceptual" View of Simple Arithmetic", Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(2) p. 116–40
Gray, E. M. & Tall, D. O. (2001). Relationships between embodied objects and symbolic procepts: An explanatory theory of success and failure in mathematics. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of 25th annual conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 3, 65–72. Utrecht: The Netherlands.
Gray & Tall (1992). Success and failure in mathematics: Procept and procedure. In Workshop on Mathematics Education and Computers, (pp. 209-21), Taipei: Taipei National University
Heidari, F. & Asghary, N. (2021). Students’ perception of letters as specific unknown and variable: The Case of Iran. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 11(1), 79-92. doi: 10.47750/jett.2020.11.01.008
Hiebert, J. & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in math- ematics: An introduc- tory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and Pro- cedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics (pp. 1 27). Hillsdale, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hoch, M. & Dreyfus, T. (2006). Structure sense versus manipulation skills: An unexpected result. In J. Novotn¶a, H. Moraov¶a, M. Kr¶atk¶a, & N. Stehl¶³kov¶a (Eds.), Proceedings 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psy- chology of Mathematics Education, Prague, Vol. 3 (pp. 305{312).
Kaput, J. 1. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. 1. Kaput, D. W. Carraher & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 5-17). New York, NY: Routledge
Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Reston, V A: NCTM.
Küchemann, D. (1981). ‘Algebra’, in K. Hart (ed.), Children's Understanding of Mathematics: 11–16, Murray, London, pp. 102–119.
Linchevski, L., & Herscovics, N. (1994). Cognitive obstacles in pre-algebra In J. P. da Ponte & J. F. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, 176-183). Lisbon, Porgugal: PME.
Linchevski, L., & Livneh, D. (1999). Structure sense: The relationship between algebraic and numerical contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2), 173-196.
Matz, M. (1980). Towards a computational theory of algebraic competence. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 3, 93-166.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Radford, L. (1997). On Psychology, Historical Epistemology and the Teaching of Mathematics: Towards a Socio-Cultural History of Mathematics, Forthe Learning of Mathematics, 17 (1), 26-33
Radford, L. (2001). The historical origins of algebraic thinking. In R. Sutherland, T. Rojano, A. Bell & R. Lins (Eds.), Perspectives on School Algebra (pp. 13-63). Dordrecht: Kluwer. 
Rystedt, E. (2015). Encountering algebraic letters, expressions and equations: A study of small group discussions in a Grade 6 classroom. (Licentiate thesis). Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
Schoenfeld, A. H., & Arcavi, A. (1988). On the meaning of variable. Mathematics Teacher, 81, 420-427.
Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: reflections on process and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1-36.
Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The gains and the pitfalls of reification? The case of algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(26), 191–228.
Star, J. (2005). Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(5), 404-411.
Trigueros, M. & Ursini, S. (2003). First-year undergraduates’ difficulties in working with different uses of variable. In Selden, A., Dubinsky, E., Harel, G., & Hitt, F. Eds. Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. V. Providence, RI: AMS/MAA. p. 1-29
Van Amerom, B.A. (2003). Focusing on informal strategies when linking arithmetic to early algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54, pp. 63-75.
Warren, E. (2003). The role of arithmetic structure in the transition from arithmetic to algebra. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(2), 122-137.
Wheeler, D. (1996). Backwards and Forward: Reflection On Different Approaches to Algebra.