MATALLIOTAKI, E., (2012). Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What are children capable of and in which conditions? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(2), 283-299 (DRAFT)

ForPeerReview
Only
Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What
Are Children Capable of and under which Conditions?
Journal: European Early Childhood Education Research Journal
Manuscript ID: Draft
Manuscript Type: Research paper
Keywords:
child, division, graphical representation, problem resolving,
reasoning
URL: http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/recr
European Early Childhood Education Research Journal

ForPeerReview
Only
1
Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What Are Children
Capable of and under which Conditions?
1 Theoretical Framework: Concepts and Related Research
This section presents a theoretical approach to the operations of sharing and division,
followed by a review of related studies of young children.
1.1 Concepts on Division and Sharing
Division is an important arithmetical operation because even college students and adults
misunderstand this subject. Meanwhile, relatively less empirical research exists on the
beginnings of the learning of division than on other arithmetical operations. However, division is
interesting from the point of view of the schemas of action: the schema of sharing is at the base
of division. This idea is founded on Piaget’s claim that the sensory motor schemas are the bases
of subsequent formal constructions.
From the perspective of the mathematical definition of division, the idea that the activity
of sharing is a mathematical activity is contestable. Sharing concerns a form of socialisation.
However, from the developmental point of view, it is possible to consider that the schema of
sharing, which brings into play correspondences and the constitution of equivalent classes, can
constitute the first steps of division. At one time of their development, the children may be able
Page 1 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
2
to carry out division while being unaware of the mathematical components involved (Frydman
and Bryant, 1988); these are generally learned later.
1.2 Existing Studies on the Solution of Division Problems or Sharing by Young Children
This section will review empirical studies on partitive and quotitive division among
children between 5 and 6,5 years old.
1.2.1 Strategies of Resolution used by Children in Problems of Division
Kouba (1989) asked children between the ages of six and nine to solve division problems
that she presented to them verbally. She identifies three types of problems depending on the
required quantity.
1. Multiplication (unknown number of elements of the totality of the group)
2. Quotitive division (unknown number of subsets)
3. Partitive division (unknown number of elements constituting each subset)
Kouba suggested that the context of the relations between the quantities in a division
problem contributes to the difficulty of the problems more than it does in addition or subtraction
problems. Vergnaud (1983) and Fischbein et al. (1985) have stated that each arithmetical
operation is related to an intuitive, implicit, unconscious and primitive model. This model
Page 2 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
3
influences the decisions made when an operation is used. Fischbein et al. propose that—in
addition—the intuitive model is ‘put together’ while in subtraction it is ‘removed’; for
multiplication, it is the repeated addition, and for quotitive division, it is the model of repeated
subtraction. For partitive division, it is sharing.
The children in the study of Kouba were interviewed individually, and the strategies of
resolution were categorized as ‘inappropriate’, ‘appropriate’, and ‘not identifiable’, independent
of the accuracy of the calculation. The questioned children had concrete objects in case they
expressed the need to use them to help in answering the questions.
Kouba counted 333 suitable strategies of the 768 problems suggested and, among these,
56 different strategies, which is considerable compared to the standard procedures that were
taught. These 56 strategies were analysed according to two criteria: the degree of abstraction of
the step and the mode of use of the objects placed at participants’ disposal.
The results concerning the youngest children (six years old)—close to those of
Matalliotaki’s (2007) empirical study—indicate a 63 percent of the children solved the problems
correctly.
1.2.2 Solution to Partitive or Partitive and Quotitive Problems
Squire and Bryant’s (2002) study used material supports to highlight the importance of
the schemas of action in solving partitive problems.
In their study, children from five to eight years old were asked to solve problems
requiring them to distribute candies among dolls; the candies were divided among boxes in a
variety of ways. The number of candies in each box corresponded either to the divisor or the
Page 3 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
4
quotient. Before every experiment a “control” (“baseline trial”) condition was established in
which all of the candies were piled in front of dolls (Figure 1, right side).
Figure 1. Distribution of Dolls and Candies, according to Squire and Bryant (2002)
On the left side of Figure 1, the top figure represents the grouping by the divisor (the
number of boxes corresponding to the numbers of dolls); the bottom figure represents the
grouping by the quotient.
The principal result of this study is that, for all examined ages, the children were helped
more by the grouping by divisor than by the grouping by quotient. The ability of the children to
solve the problem by grouping by quotient improves with age. This can be explained, according
to Squire and Bryant by the improvement in the capacity to use the one-to-one correspondence
with age, or by the fact that older children eventually learn to understand the interchangeability
of the divisor and the quotient.
Including questions about the number of boxes and the number of candies actually
improves children’s scores when grouping by quotient. According to Squire and Bryant, this
made it possible for children to use additive instead of multiplicative reasoning. This was
confirmed by additional studies (Sophian et al., 1991) that found that, in children ages five and
six, passage by the addition plays a facilitating role.
The spatial arrangement of dolls and candies influences the children’s ability to solve the
problem. Squire and Bryant suggest that children’s performance might be better if they can
rearrange the objects themselves. They posit that handling of the objects or their images
Page 4 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
5
improves accuracy. The older children perform better because that they have a greater capacity
“to mentally rearrange” the whole under the condition of grouping per quotient.
This study also demonstrates that children’s early comprehension of division is
influenced by their comprehension of level sharing and the distribution of portions to recipients.
Consequently, we can assume that informal experiences affect the learning of mathematics. This
finding has important educational implications.
Another study carried out by Squire and Bryant (2002) compared the procedures used to
solve partitive and quotitive problems. In their study, two conditions were presented: a partitive
task in which the objects were grouped either by divisor or by quotient, and a quotitive task with
the same two groupings. The children found the grouping by divisor to be easier when solving
the partitive division problem and the grouping by quotient to be easier for quotitive division.
According to Squire and Bryant, such results must imply non-mathematical factors since in
mathematical terms there were no differences between the two conditions. Therefore, they
suggest that the most convincing reason for this difference between the two conditions is a
cognitive one.
The authors suggest that, even if certain models are strongly artificial and benefit only
from cultural drives (for example, in “pure” mathematics), others are probably acquired without
explicit instruction and are used by everyone. According to this approach, informal experience
can plausibly contribute to the formation of a “mental model” of the concepts and, consequently,
children can start to acquire a mental model of division by sharing. In other words, sharing can
be a schema of action by which a comprehension of division develops. This developmental
concept of the formation of the concepts supports Vergnaud, who granted a crucial role to the
Page 5 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
6
schemas of action1
. The schemas of action would be primary and be the matrix for the
construction of the concepts.
Another interesting element arising from the work of Squire and Bryant is that the
difference between the children with better performances and those who encountered difficulties
in performing the tasks occurs only at the plan of the selected procedures of resolution (and not
the amount of time needed to arrive at a correct answer). This resulted in stressing the procedures
rather than speed or accuracy. This aspect was retained when designing tasks for the current
study.
1.2.3 The Inverse Divisor-quotient in Relation to Partitive and Quotitive Tasks
Correa, Nunes, and Bryant’s study (1998) pertained to partitive and quotitive tasks; it
drew a conceptual distinction between sharing and division. In sharing, children treat only the
equivalence of the shares. The concept of division, in contrast, implies the comprehension of the
relations of three values represented by the dividend, the divisor, and the quotient. The
equivalence of the shares is assumed, although in division children must understand that the
larger the number of shares, the smaller those shares will be.
In their studies the children understood well that, if the divisor (for example, the number
of rabbits) increases, the quotient (for example, the number of carrots per rabbit), decreases.
Comprehension improved with age, even though young children understood partitive tasks better
than they did quotitive ones, their abilities to perform both tasks was impressive.
1
The schemas of action (schèmes d'action) are familiar actions that can offer initial comprehension of the arithmetic
operations (Vergnaud, 1985).
Page 6 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
7
1.3 Graphical Productions of the Children during Problem Solving
There are virtually no studies on the graphical productions of young children’s ability to
solve division problems, so we make use of the work that has been done in other fields of
problem solving.
Weil-Barais and Resta-Schweitzer (2008, 2006) showed that the graphical productions of
children between five and six years of age years reveal the degree of conceptualisation in
physical phenomena. The drawings are one means by which children express a complex
phenomenon, since they facilitate the expression of the spatial relations of the objects. Tantaros
et al. (2005) studied the production of graphical representations by young children in order to
communicate the solution of a problem and concluded that children’s productions improve with
age and that drawings can constitute a cognitive tool. Lehrer and Schauble (2002) consider that a
representation is not only a copy of reality. That implies inventing and adapting conventions of a
system of representation in order to choose, compose and transport information. Children learned
that a system of representation could represent information that was not immediately perceptible.
The authors conclude that developing adequate graphical representations for information
represented conventionally, promotes the learning of the mathematical concepts that are needed
for comprehension of the properties of this information.
Based on the research that has been cited, we expect the use of graphical representations
by children will make it easier for them to solve division problems. The drawings can include the
graphic strategies to follow since the icons let children visualize the position of the mathematical
elements and the relations between them. We expect that the children will use the drawings as a
tool to envision the connections among the elements.
Page 7 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
8
1.4 Justification of Empirical Problems
The studies presented in this article suggest that there is very little empirical research on
young children’s ability to solve division problems. However, it is an interesting operation as the
schema of action that it mobilises is level sharing—an activity that concerns a form of
socialisation and has mathematical aspects.
Even if the level sharing belongs to the informal experience of the child, division is
regarded as a more complex operation than addition or subtraction due to the relations between
the quantities. However, even if it is more complex arithmetical operation, children—even those
as young as five—participating in the studies showed remarkable success with certain division
problems. This supports the idea that the direct instruction of division is not essential in the
formation of the concept—at least in its least conceptually elaborate form (level sharing).
The characteristics of division raised in the studies reported in this article justify the
choice of graphical representations. Indeed, if the regroupings that need to be realised in order to
carry out a quotitive division can be materialised by a distribution in boxes (cf experiments by
Squire and Bryant, 2002), they can also be the subject of graphical representations.
In Squire and Bryant’s (2002) study, the children could not rearrange the objects or to
modify their distribution. However, the use of graphical representations makes it possible to
consider and preserve several types of regroupings. Thus, as suggested by Squire and Bryant the
physical handling of objects can help children to solve complex problems; thus, it would be
interesting to examine in what contexts the use of graphical representations plays a facilitating
role. Furthermore, Kouba wonders if the categories of resolution that she distinguished in her
study would be the same if the problems had employed graphic supports instead of physical
Page 8 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
9
objects. Considering the fact that the youngest children have difficulty keeping several variables
in mind and performing complex operations, the graphical representations of a problem can
indeed facilitate the handling of such situations by young children.
For the problems designed herein, quotitive division was chosen because studies have
demonstrated that this type of division appears more complex (and is thus more interesting to
study) for children than partitive division. The intuitive model of quotitive division is the
repeated subtraction. The children have already experienced the schema of the action of sharing,
which applies to partitive division, while the schemas of the action of subtraction, which apply to
quotitive division, are more difficult to follow. Employing the categorisation of Kouba (1989),
the first four problems proposed to the children belong to the category “division quotitive-
grouping” and the last two problems belong to the “division quotitive-set” category.
Furthermore, a study of tasks intended for the children of 5,5 to 6,5 years old,
Matalliotaki (2007) found that very few problems presented to children ask them to make
inferences. Several reasons may explain this fact. Children of this age may not have developed
the capacity to draw inferences from graphic information. Moreover, these inferences may rely
on formal knowledge that the children have not yet acquired, since the literature does not
envisage this type of exercise.
Page 9 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
10
To document the first interpretation, the current study conceived problems that seemed a
priori adapted to the children of five to six years old of a nursery school, although quasi non-
existent in the consulted school exercises (Matalliotaki, 2007). In these problems, the children
must make inferences related to quantities. More precisely, these situations focus on quotitive
division: a number of objects in total and a number of objects by recipients being indicated to
determine the number of recipients. In mathematical terms, this involves giving the quantity of a
group and the number of elements constituting the subsets (or parts) so as to find the number of
subsets (or of parts). When not having easy-to-handle objects, young children involved in this
study could solve these problems by the use of graphical representations.
2 Empirical Study
In this section we present the results of an empirical study that we conducted in a nursery
school in France.
2.1 Methodological Framework
We present the methodological framework of the empirical study, consisting of the
population chosen, the study design, and the description of the problems presented to the
children.
Page 10 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
11
2.1.1 Subjects and Design
Fifty-five nursery school children in good academic standing n the 13th arrondissement
(district) of Paris took part in this research. The children ranged from 5 years to 6 years 6 months
in age. The 31 boys and 24 girls were divided among three classes. Their parents signed a
consent form authorising their children’s participation in the study.
The children were interviewed individually. The child and the researcher sat face to face
at table with sheets of paper and coloured pencils.
In the Gloves-Socks-Footballers test, some boards (figures 2 to 4) are presented to the
child progressively. In addition, for any answer given by the child, the researcher asks him or her
to explain how he or she arrived at the answer, and noted the explanation without expressing
approval or disapproval.
Each child was given as much time as he or she needed to answer each questions. The
meetings were video recorded.
Page 11 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
12
2.1.2 Description of the Problems
The problems were first presented verbally and then with a graphic support, which
reflected the facts of the case. The introduction of the graphic support is regarded as a new
problem (not as a means of assisting with the verbal one), even if the quantitative information
and the structure of the problem were the same. The purpose of the exercise was to examine the
types of strategies that the children use both with and without the graphic support, not only to
ascertain if they were able to solve a division problem, as previous studies have demonstrated.
Problem of the Gloves: Oral Presentation. The first question was “how many children
can one equip with six gloves?” This first problem implies minor amounts, which children of this
age can process either mentally or with the use of fingers. The solution of such a problem can be
based on the child’s cultural experience and on body consciousness (demonstrated in
Matalliotaki 2001), which indicates that a person with two hands needs two gloves. The children
must thus deduce that, as each child needs two gloves (cardinal of the subsets), six gloves can
equip three children. The problem can be formalised as follows.
2 gloves 1 child
6 gloves X children
For children, at an age where they are not yet able to produce formal mathematical
notations, it is possible to await an analogue representation (mental or written) close to that the
following:
Page 12 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
13
••
••
••
The number of points of each group represents the divisor while the number of groups
represents the quotient. We note that these problems (and the ones that follow) involve additive
reasoning (prepare three pairs and then add them to find the correct answer), which, according to
Squire and Bryant (2002) and Sophian et al. (1991), plays a facilitating role for children of this
age.
Problem of the Gloves: Pictorial Display. The second problem proposes a schematisation
of the data likely to facilitate the choice of a strategy of resolution. The same problem is verbally
presented, but this time accompanied by a board (with the format 21x 29,7) that graphically
represents the objects. Figure 1 presents a reduced graphical representation that was presented to
the children.
Figure 2. Reduction of the Graphic Support Accompanying the Pictorial Display of the “Gloves” Problem
This schematisation was conceived in order to facilitate the grouping of the elements
(construction of the groups, which indicate the number of elements of each group). In this
manner, introducing the strategy to be followed for the resolution of the problem involves the
Page 13 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
14
constitution of the regroupings (subsets) and their enumeration. The graphical representation
would provide an inferential function as it makes it possible to calculate a quotient. Few
drawings accompanying the exercises by mathematics perform this function (Matalliotaki, 2007),
which is why this study examines whether or not this type of drawing could help children
complete a calculation.
The drawn elements are not perfectly ordered because the presence of the identical
features between the gloves of each pair is expected to be sufficient for completion of the
groupings.
Problem of the Socks: Oral Presentation. The third problem utilised the same structure as
the first, but with larger quantities: how many children can one equip with twelve socks? Here,
the quantities are not readily processed with the use of fingers, thus legitimating the use of a
schematisation of the data.
Problem of the Socks: Pictorial Display. The same problem was put to the children, with
a drawing of six pairs of socks (with the format 21x 29,7). Two versions were proposed: one in
which the pairs of socks are locatable by graphic characteristics (see Figure 2, left side) and one
in which all the socks were drawn in the same way (see Figure 2, right side). These two versions
were presented to two groups of children in the same age cohort. It is assumed that the first
drawing performs two functions—referential and inferential—as it provides indices for
regrouping by two: the child can find the answer by counting only the different socks. The
second drawing performs only one referential function. It can perform an inferential function if
the children produce graphical indices of regrouping. These two versions were proposed in order
to examine the impact of the inferential function on children’s performances in a concrete
manner.
Page 14 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
15
Figure 3. Reduction of the Graphical Representation Accompanying the “Socks” Problem.
Problem of the Footballers: Oral Presentation. Unlike previous problems, this problem
proposes a more formal mathematical problem:
Eight footballers will practice in pairs (i.e., two by two: This explanation was
incorporated when some children started to solve the problem under the
assumption that there would be two groups. The sentence “they will be involved
in groups of two” did not appear clear enough to describe the formation of the
groups. ). Each group will have a ball. How many balls will be used?
The children are expected to solve this problem using the former experience (graphical
resolution of the problems). A possible schematisation of the procedure used to solve this
problem might be as follows:
8 footballers 2+2+2+2
2 + 2 + 2 + 2 footballers
1+ 1+ 1+ 1 balls
or more formally:
Page 15 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
16
2 footballers 1 ball
8 footballers X ball
from which we get the equation b = f/g, where b is the sought quotient, f the full number of
footballers, and g the number of footballers in each group.
For children of this age, who have not yet received formal instruction in mathematics, an
analogue representation seems more suitable:
• • • •
In this representation, the squares represent the footballers and the circles the balls. The two
footballers in each group represent the divisor and the number of built footballer couples
represents the quotient. This problem represents for the children a more complex situation than
does preceding problems because the bond with the human body no longer exists, thereby
eliminating a familiar context to which the child can refer. The context is more formal even if
football is an interest of the children. The number of balls per player is arbitrary, which is not the
case in regards to the gloves or socks, which are always in pairs. The children must thus
memorise information (i.e., one ball for every two players), which may contradict what children
usually associate with balls.
Page 16 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
17
Problem of the Footballers: Pictorial Display. This problem was presented to the
children along with a drawing (with the format 21 x 29,7) (see Figure 4). Unlike the second and
fourth problems, both balls and players are represented here. After the grouping of the players in
pairs, the children can connect each group to a balloon and count the number of connections.
Figure 4. Reduction of the Graphical Representation Accompanying the “Footballers” Problem.
The suggested schematisation does not provide an inferential function as the drawing
does not propose elements that would support the grouping or the connection of each group with
one ball. This last problem was conceived to test if a representation very close to an environment
familiar to the child (e.g., story books with illustrations, images in media) can be seen and
handled in an abstract context of mathematics when the children have not received formal
education in mathematics. According to Squire and Bryant (2002), informal experiences can
affect the acquisition of mathematical skills. In our study we determine whether or not an
informal context that is familiar to children facilitates their problem solving.
Table I provides, in a synthetic form, the problems suggested to the children within the
framework of this empirical study.
Table I: Problems Addressed to Children and Their Instructions
Page 17 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
18
3 Results
Three situations were presented to the children, first verbally, then in writing (through a
drawing of the objects). The written form is associated with a greater number of correct answers
(11 percent of correct answers to the oral examination compared to 40 percent in the written
form). In the written form, the problem of the footballers proves to be more difficult but it is
nevertheless solved correctly by approximately one-third of the children.
In order to arrive at the correct answer the children inevitably followed the suitable strategy.
Two strategies were identified: pairing with enumeration of the groups (correct strategy) and the
one-to-one correspondence (incorrect strategy).
Table II presents the number of children who followed the correct mathematical strategy to
solve the problems (pairing and counting of the built groups) and the number of children that
followed the incorrect strategy (the one-to-one correspondence). To determine if the children
followed the one-to-one correspondence strategy, it was enough to see their answer. If the
answer to the problem of gloves, for example, were 6, it means that the child distributed a glove
to each child instead of building pairs of gloves. In following table, OOC means one-to-one
correspondence and G/CG means Grouping and Counting of the built groups.
Table II: Summary of the Mathematical Strategies Used by the Children according to Age
Page 18 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
19
We observe the use of the strategy of one-to-one correspondence progressively in the
long-term performance of the tasks. According to table II, the children seem to give it up
gradually.
Some children seem to have understood the strategy or building groups in order to solve
the problems but for some reason, they could not make this strategy succeed. We thus present in
table III the number of these children (by age) through the problems, in comparison to the
number of children who answered it correctly. In the table, G means Grouping and represents the
number of children who carried out the grouping and CA represents the number of children who
answered correctly.
Since authors like Squire and Bryant discovered that even a few months of difference in
the age of the subjects could play a significant part in their ability to understand symbolic
notations, we carried out an analysis of the performances of the children depending their age.
Table III: Mathematical Strategies Used by the Children by Age
In problems such as the graphical problem of gloves, nine children carried out the grouping
correctly but could not to finish the procedure and solve the problem. This leads us to suppose
that the children knew which strategy to follow (thanks to the preceding problem) but were not
ready to apply until the end. This can explain the absence of “grouping” without arriving at the
correct answer in the first problem, where the children did not have yet a mathematical model of
a strategy on which they could rely.
Page 19 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
20
3.1 Improvement of Performance through the Tasks
We observed (cf table III) a progressive improvement of the children’s performance of the
tasks. The children abandoned the erroneous strategy, by gradually applying the strategy of
grouping the elements.
The children spontaneously used an analogue representation (their fingers) when the
problems were verbally explained to them, but not for the first problem. Moreover, when they
used their fingers, the use that they made of their fingers (which represented the elements) was
influenced by the drawings that we presented to them in the preceding problems thanks to which
they managed to find the right strategy to solve the problem. This shows that the children were
influenced by our suggestion to use a graphical representation, which ensures the inferential
function to solve problems; they seem to trust this tool.
Indeed, the inferential function ensured by the first drawing (gloves) and generally, the
fact of suggesting to children the use of an analogical system, influenced them to find an
analogical strategy to solve the following problem. David had a typical example of a graphical
production (cf figure 5): he used graphical representations that were very similar to the drawing
that had been presented to him to solve the problem of the footballers. David did not use such
drawings for the first problems that had been presented to him, so we can conclude that the
graphical representations that we introduced influenced him to choose such a technique to solve
the problem.
Figure 5: Graphical Production of David for the Resolution of the Problem Footballers Exposed Orally
Page 20 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
21
This figurative drawing leads us to conclude which strategy that the pupil applies to solve
this type of problem:
• Distinguishes each footballer as a mathematical unit
• Gathers two footballers
• Allots to each pair of footballers a balloon.
3.2 Errors of Children: Not to Escape the Aesthetic or Pragmatic Context
We tried to locate the error children most often made during problem solving in order to
understand their reasoning and to identify the possible reasons for their inability to reach correct
solutions.
The children answer graphically or verbally by drawing or colouring the sketch given to
them, or while producing conclusions relating to their cultural knowledge of the problem. For
example, the footballers will need only one ball because football is played with one ball.
Page 21 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
22
Some children had difficulty in abandoning the semantic context. Fifteen of the 55 children
stated that the footballers would need one ball in the oral problem of footballers (by justifying
their answer “the football game is played with one ball”). In the graphic version of this same
problem only seven of the children answered that one ball would be used.
We saw that children were influenced by the graphic data in giving their answer and that they
had difficulty in remembering the instructions. We suppose that children of this age, as affirmed
by Squire and Bryant (2002), often reinterpret problems in a way that makes sense for them. The
pragmatic context of children influences their interpretation of the instruction. We can assume,
then, that with these kinds of problems, the informal context of children did not facilitate the
solution.
4 General Discussion
For the three situations, the drawing allowed the children to solve the problem by gathering
pairs of objects. In the verbal form of the problems we were not able to identify the strategies
used by the children; without paper and pencil, the children are not able to keep track of their
train of thought in order to solve problems that had been presented to them orally.
According to table II, the children gradually abandoned the strategy of one-to-one
correspondence. This means that children received some training in the resolution of the
problems that required the same strategy. Children of this age do not have experience in solving
problems of quotitive division. The choice of the erroneous mathematical strategy thus seems to
make sense. What is astonishing is the fact that children have been able to find the correct
strategy despite their lack of experience in division. This shows that the children of this age have
the ability to solve such abstract problems.
Page 22 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
23
As they continue working, more of the children build groups correctly, even if they do
not reach the correct answer. This enables us to say that there is an improvement in their
execution of a mathematical strategy, while passing from one problem to the other. The first
improvement seen was the gradual abandonment of the one-to-one correspondence strategy.
In table 3 we also observe that the number of the correct answers increases with age,
which can show an improvement of certain capacities of children with age. In the graphical
problem of gloves for example, among the oldest children, ten came up with the solution to the
problem; only five of the youngest children.
We also observed that the youngest children found it more difficult to transform a
“grouping” into a ‘correct answer’. Thus the correct strategy might depend on a capacity, which
is acquired with age: the capacity to coordinate the parameters of a problem and to retain them in
memory (Squire and Bryant 2002). The youngest children can conceive the correct mathematical
strategy to solve the problem but their ability to perform complex operations and to store partial
products remains immature. Therefore in general, the idea to accompany a problem with a
graphical representation would affect the performances of the youngest children. In order to
confirm this assumption, a test with a larger number of children in each age cohort would be
necessary.
The graphic version given to the children helped them not only to find the correct
strategy for the resolution, but it also gave them an analogical strategy with which to solve the
verbal problems and to escape from the semantic context of the problems which frequently
constrains children of this age.
Page 23 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
24
The children, even without experience with and formal capacities of this type of exercises,
managed to solve the problems and to acquire the training to improve their performance. The
children’s observed successes at division at an early age should encourage educators to make the
most of their competences, even though official school programmes do not do so. Indeed,
younger children are fully capable of learning division, and this capacity should be cultivated
sooner instead of later. This justifies that research among pre-school age children on this topic
should continue.
Page 24 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
25
References
Correa, Jane, Terezinha Nunes, and Peter Bryant. 1998. Young children’s understanding of
division: The relationship between division terms and a non-computational task. Journal
of Educational Psychology 2: 321-329.
Fischbein, Efraim, Maria Deri, Maria Sainati Nello, and Maria Sciolis Marino. 1985. The role of
implicit models in solving verbal problems in multiplication and division. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education 16: 3-17.
Frydman, Oliver and Peter Bryant. 1988. Sharing and the understanding of number equivalence
by young children. Cognitive Development,3: 323-339.
Gaux, Christine, Lydie Iralde, Annick Weil-Barais, and Aline Ferte. 2005. Evolution de
l’utilisation des systèmes de notation pour communiquer à autrui la construction d’un
objet, entre le cours élémentaire 1ère
année et le cours moyen 2ème
année (de 7 à 11 ans).
Colloque Noter pour penser, Angers, 26-27 January 2005.
Kouba, Vicky. 1989. Children’s solution strategies for equivalent set multiplication and division
word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 20: 147-158.
Page 25 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
26
Lehrer, Richard and Leona Schauble. 2002. Symbolic Communication in Mathematics and
Science: Co-Constituting Inscription and Thought. In: E. Amsel, J. Byrnes (Ed),
Language, Literacy, and Cognitive Development. London: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Matalliotaki, Eirini. 2001. L’utilisation du dessin comme outil cognitif à l’école maternelle.
Mémoire de D.E.A en sciences de l’éducation, Université René Descartes-Paris 5.
---. 2007. Les pratiques graphiques à l’école maternelle dans un contexte de résolution de
problèmes. Thèse de Doctorat en Sciences de l’Education, Université René Descartes-
Paris 5.
Resta-Schweitzer, Marcela and Annick Weil-Barais. 2006. Education scientifique et
développement intellectuel du jeune enfant. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT
Education 1: 63-82
Sophian, Catherine. 1991. Le nombre et sa genèse avant l’école primaire. Comment s’en inspirer
pour enseigner les mathématiques. In : Jacqueline Bideaud, Claire Meljac and Jean- Paul
Fischer (Eds.), Les chemins du nombre (pp. 35-58). Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.
Squire, Sarah and Peter Bryant. 2002a. The influence of sharing in young children’s
understanding of division. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 81: 1-43.
Page 26 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
27
---. 2002b. From sharing to dividing: The development of children’s understanding of division.
Developmental Science 5: 452-466.
---. 2003. Children’s models of division. Cognitive Development 18 : 355-376.
Tantaros, Spyridon, Kalypso Sarigianni, Evmorfia Sotiropoulou, Dimitris Koliopoulos, and
Konstantinos Ravanis. 2005 Etude des notations à visée communicationnelle par des
enfants d’une école primaire en Grèce dans le cadre d’une activité scientifique. Colloque
Noter pour Penser, Angers, 26-27 January 2005.
Vergnaud, Gérard. 1983. L’enfant, la mathématique et la réalité. Bern : Peter Lang.
---. 1985. Concepts et schèmes dans une théorie opératoire de la représentation. Psychologie
française 30 : 245-252.
Weil-Barais, Annick and Marcela Resta-Schweitzer. 2008. Approche cognitive et
développementale de la médiation en contexte d’enseignement – apprentissage. Nouvelle Revue
AIS 42 : 83-98.
Page 27 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
1
Tables and illustrations for Article: Resolution of Division Problems by Young
Children: What Are Children Capable of and under which Conditions?
Figure 1. Distribution of Dolls and Candies, according to Squire and Bryant (2002)
Figure 2. Reduction of the Graphic Support Accompanying the Pictorial Display of the “Gloves” Problem
Page 28 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
2
Figure 3. Reduction of the Graphical Representation Accompanying the “Socks” Problem.
Figure 4. Reduction of the Graphical Representation Accompanying the “Footballers” Problem.
Page 29 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
3
Problems Instructions
1 Gloves oral
quotitive-grouping division
How many children can one equip with 6
gloves?
2 Gloves pictorial display
How many children can one equip with
these gloves? (showing the “gloves” board)
3 Socks oral
How many children can one equip with 12
socks?
4 Socks pictorial display
How many children can one equip with
these socks? (showing the “socks” board)
5 Footballers oral
quotitive-set division
Eight footballers will practice in groups of 2.
Each group will have 1 ball. How many
balls will be used?
6 Footballers pictorial display
quotitive-set division
The footballers you see here will practice in
groups of 2. Each group will have 1 ball.
How many balls will be used? (showing the
“footballers” board)
Table I: Problems Addressed to Children and Their Instructions
Page 30 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
4
Problems Strategies Number
of
children
Total of
children
OOC 17 55Gloves oral
examination G/CG 9 55
OOC 20 55Gloves
graphical
examination
G/CG
24
55
OOC 18 55Socks oral
examination
G/CG 5 55
OOC 15 55Socks
graphical
examination
G/CG
24
55
OOC 12 55Footballers
oral
examination
G/CG
5
55
OOC 4 55Footballers
graphical
examination
G/CG
19
55
Table II: Summary of the Mathematical Strategies Used by the Children according to Age
Page 31 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
5
Problems
Grouping
Correct
Answers
4,11-5,6
years
old
5,7-5,11
years
old
6-6,6
years
old
Total
G
0 0 0 0
Gloves oral
examination
CA 3 3 3 9
G
4 2 3 9
Gloves
graphical
examination
CA
5 9 10 24
G
1 1 0 2
Socks oral
examination
CA 1 1 3 5
G
1 2 1 4
Socks
graphical
examination
CA
8 7 9 24
G
1 1 2 4
Footballers
oral
examination
CA
0 2 3 5
G
2 0 0 2
Footballers
graphical
examination
CA
4 8 7 19
Table III: Mathematical Strategies Used by the Children by Age
Figure 5: Graphical Production of David for the Resolution of the Problem Footballers Exposed Orally
Page 32 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

ForPeerReview
Only
Summary of article: Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What Are Children
Capable of and under which Conditions?
In this paper we explore the theoretical and experimental field of sharing and partitive and
quotitive division problems, as illustrated by recent studies in this field. The purpose was to
explain and justify the utility of presenting quotitive division problems, accompanied by
graphical representations, to young children. The current study presents six problems
suggested to children of 5 to 6,5 years old within the framework of an empirical study. The
studies prove that quotitive division is accessible to young children. The manipulation of
graphical representations in order to solve these problems proves to be more efficient than the
oral presentation of the problems.
Key words: child, division, graphical representation, problem resolving and reasoning
Page 33 of 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60

MATALLIOTAKI, E., (2012). Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What are children capable of and in which conditions? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(2), 283-299 (DRAFT)

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (8)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (11)

Ähnlich wie MATALLIOTAKI, E., (2012). Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What are children capable of and in which conditions? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(2), 283-299 (DRAFT)

Ähnlich wie MATALLIOTAKI, E., (2012). Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What are children capable of and in which conditions? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(2), 283-299 (DRAFT) (20)

Mehr von eirinimatalliotaki

Mehr von eirinimatalliotaki (8)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

MATALLIOTAKI, E., (2012). Resolution of Division Problems by Young Children: What are children capable of and in which conditions? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(2), 283-299 (DRAFT)