Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT. Two classes (one experimental and one control) in a public elementary
school located in southern Taiwan participated in this study. Number sense activities were
conducted in the experimental class as supplementary teaching materials, while the control
class followed the standard mathematics curriculum. Data indicate that there are statisti-
cally significant differences between pretest and posttest (pretest and retention-test) scores
for the experimental and control classes at the 0.01 level. The scores for the experimental
class increased 44% after instruction (the mean score went from 12.35 to 17.81), while the
scores for the control class increased only 10% after instruction (the mean score went from
11.29 to 12.42). Compared to the control class, the experimental class made much more
progress on number sense tests. Results indicate that students in the teaching class (not
including the students in the low level) advanced in their use of number sense strategies
when responding to interview questions. The data demonstrate that the teaching of number
sense activities, executed in the experimental class, is effective in developing children’s
number sense. Furthermore, the results of retention demonstrate that the students’ learning
was meaningful and significant.
KEY WORDS: benchmarks, control class, estimation, experimental class, number sense
Ning, 1992), but research related to number sense has received little at-
tention. During the past two years, due to its emphasis in the NCTM
Standards, number sense has stimulated a growing amount of attention
and research in Taiwan. There is currently an important mathematics edu-
cational revolution in Taiwan. The guidelines for a Nine-Year Joint Math-
ematics Curricula Plan (Ministry of Education in Taiwan, 2000) stresses
that the learning and teaching of mathematics should highlight meaning-
ful connections with real life. The new guidelines for the mathematics
curricula plan and number sense both focus on meaningful learning. If
important reforms of mathematics education in Taiwan are to be made, the
development of number sense should be integrated into the mathematics
curriculum.
The purpose of this study was to report the results of an intervention
study conducted on Taiwanese fifth graders. The related research question
is:
Can number sense be fostered by appropriate teaching?
BACKGROUND
M ETHOD
Sample
A public school located in a city in southern Taiwan was selected to partic-
ipate in this study. Two classes (an experimental class and a control class)
were studied. Number sense activities were conducted in the experimental
class as supplementary teaching materials, while the control class followed
the standard mathematics curriculum. The school, which comprised about
3000 students, serves children from diverse areas. The students in the study
come from families with a wide range of occupations, incomes, and edu-
cational levels. The experimental class consisted of 37 students (20 boys
and 17 girls), and the control class consisted of 38 students (20 boys and
18 girls).
Based on the students’ performance on the pretest, students in each
class were divided into the following three levels: High – top 10%; Middle
– 40–60%; Low – bottom 10%. Two students were randomly selected from
each level and interviewed before instruction, after instruction, and four
months after the study. Therefore, the sample consisted of 12 students, in-
cluding the low- (TL12, CL12), middle- (TM12, CM12), and high- (TH12,
CH12) level students.
Instructional Activities
This study defined the five number sense components based on the existing
number sense related research reports and documents as described earlier.
The instructional activities were designed according to the above number
sense framework. Five units of number sense activities were designed for
TEACHING AND LEARNING NUMBER SENSE 119
the use of the teacher. Each unit included 5 lessons. For example, one of
the estimation lesson was as following:
1. (a) Please estimate the area and perimeter of the playground in our
school.
Explain how you reached your answer.
(b) Estimate how many students can be contained in our school’s play-
ground. Explain how you reached your answer.
Assessment Instruments
Assessment instruments included paper-and-pencil tests and interviews.
Analysis
The NSRS included 37 items. Each item was given 1 point if correct,
no point if incorrect. No partial credit was awarded. Therefore, the total
possible score for the test is 37 points.
Interview. The students’ responses were examined and sorted. In an
effort to identify the different strategies used by students, each response
was coded (as correct or incorrect) according to one of the following three
categories:
120 D.-C. YANG
TABLE I
Schedule for instructions and assessments
Date
02/01/01–08/30/01 Review the related papers and design the number sense project
08/30/01–09/08/01 Pretest and pre-interview for both Exp- and Con-class
09/10/01–12/31/01 Number sense activities integrated into Exp-class
01/01/02–01/18/02 Posttest and post-interview for both Exp- and Con-class
01/19/02–02/17/02 Winter break
02/18/02–06/01/02 No number sense activities were integrated into classes
06/01/02–06/12/02 Retention-test and retention interview for Exp- and Con-class
R ESULT
Table II reports the results of mean scores (correct percent), standard devi-
ations, and t-test results for the experimental class and the control class.
The data indicate that there are statistically significant differences be-
tween pretest and posttest (pretest and retention-test) scores for both
classes. However, the scores for the experimental class increased 44% after
instruction (the mean score went from 12.35 to 17.81), while the scores
for the control class increased only 10% after instruction (the mean score
went from 11.29 to 12.42). Compared to the control class, the experimental
class made much more progress on number sense tests. This indicates that
the teaching of number sense is highly effective. The retention test results
further indicated that the teaching experiment was meaningful.
Tables III and IV report the results of students’ responses in the experi-
mental class and the control class on pre-, post-, and retention-interviews.
The results indicate that students in the teaching class (except for the
students in the low level) progressed much more in their use of number
sense strategies when responding to interview questions. The results of the
retention-interview further show that students’ learning was meaningful
and therefore long-lasting. However, students’ responses in the control
class did not advance in the use of number sense strategies after the in-
struction. In order to highlight the differences in the development and use
of number sense strategies between the experimental class and the control
class, several interview questions were presented before instruction, after
instruction, and four month after the study.
TABLE II
The mean scores (correct percent), standard deviations, and t-tests results of
number sense pretest, posttest, and retention tests for both experimental and
control classes
Pre-interview
Correct
NS-based 6 (9) 4 (5) 4 (4) 2 (3) 2 (3) 2 (3)
Rule-based 2 (4) 5 (3) 2 (0) 3 (1) 0 (0) 0 (1)
Couldn’t Ex 1 (0) 2 (1) 2 (2) 2 (2) 4 (2) 3 (2)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Rule-based 0 (2) 0 (3) 0 (4) 2 (4) 0 (3) 0 (3)
Couldn’t Ex 6 (0) 4 (3) 7 (5) 6 (5) 9 (7) 10 (6)
Post-interview
Correct
NS-based 15 (10) 11 (6) 10 (5) 12 (5) 5 (3) 5 (3)
Rule-based 0 (4) 3 (3) 2 (3) 1 (2) 0 (3) 0 (4)
Couldn’t Ex 0 (0) 0 (4) 0 (2) 0 (2) 1 (1) 3 (1)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Rule-based 0 (1) 0 (0) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (3) 0 (1)
Couldn’t Ex 0 (0) 1 (2) 2 (3) 1 (4) 8 (5) 7 (6)
Retention-interview
Correct
NS-based 15 (11) 12 (6) 11 (5) 12 (4) 5 (3) 5 (2)
Rule-based 0 (3) 1 (3) 0 (0) 2 (1) 0 (4) 1 (5)
Couldn’t Ex 0 (1) 1 (4) 1 (5) 0 (3) 4 (3) 2 (2)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Rule-based 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (1) 0 (2) 0 (0) 1 (0)
Couldn’t Ex 0 (0) 1 (2) 3 (4) 1 (5) 6 (5) 6 (6)
TABLE IV
Results from fifth grade students’ responses to the following problem:
1. Two same sized watermelons were shared by five students equally. How many
watermelons can each student have? Why?
(1) Greater than a half of a watermelon
(2) Equal to 15 of a watermelon
(3) Equal to 25 of a watermelon
(4) Greater than 2.5 watermelons
Exp-A Con-B
Correct
NS-based 1 (17%) 6 (100%) 6 (100%) 2 (33%) 3 (50%) 3 (50%)
Rule-based 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
Couldn’t explain 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Rule-based 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Couldn’t explain 2 (33%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
R: Can you tell me the answer and your reasons about question 1?
TH2: One watermelon was shared by five persons, so each one got 15 wa-
termelon. Since there are two watermelons, each person can get 25
watermelon.
TH2 gave the correct answer and reasonable explanations, so this response
was coded as Number sense-based method. Two (33%) students gave the
correct answer, by using the rule-based method. For example, (Pre-inter-
view of TM2):
Since TM2 used the rule “2 ÷ 5 = 25 ”, but could not give an explanation,
this response was coded as “ruled-based”. Another student produced the
correct answer but also couldn’t explain it (Pre-interview of TH1):
TH1: The answer is 25 .
R: Can your tell me your reasons?
TH1: I don’t know how to explain it.
This was coded as “correct and could not explain.”
Two students gave incorrect answers and also could not explain them
(Pre-interview of TL1):
TL1: The answer is 15 .
R: Can your tell me your reasons?
TL1: I don’t know.
During the post- and retention-interview, all six students in the exper-
imental class could use the number sense-based method to explain their
reasoning. In addition, four of the six students could support their answers
with pictorial representations. For example, (Post-interview of TM2):
R: Can you tell me your answer and reasons about question 1?
TM2: As you can see the picture, each watermelon can be divided into 5
parts. Each person can have 15 of one watermelon. Since there are
two watermelons, each one can get 25 watermelons.
In Con-class, the students’ responses showed not much difference on the
pre-, post-, and retention-interviews. Two (33%) students used the number
sense-based method to answer question 1 on the pre-interview, however,
only three (50%) students could apply the number sense strategy to explain
their reasons on the post- and retention-interviews. One student was able
to give the correct answer, yet could not explain why on the pre-, post-, and
retention-interviews. For example, (pre-, post-, and retention-interviews of
CM2):
R: Can you tell me your answer and reasons about question 1?
CM2: 25 . I don’t know how to explain it.
One student gave an incorrect answer on pre-, post-, and retention-inter-
views. CL2 answered: “ 15 ” and “I don’t know how to explain it.”
The data indicate that students in the Exp-class more frequently used
number sense strategies during the post and retention-interviews (100% vs.
17%), and were more successful than students in the control class (100%
vs. 50%).
Table V presents a summary of the results from fifth grader’s responses
for question 6. This question focused on investigating whether or not stu-
dents could use benchmarks. It is a more challenging question than the
126 D.-C. YANG
TABLE V
Results from fifth grade students’ responses to the following problem:
6. Without calculating, select the best estimate for 45 + 67 ? Why?
(1) 12 (2) 10 (3) 2 (4) 1 (5) Without calculating can’t find the answer
Correct
NS-based 0 (0%) 3 (50%) 4 (66%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Rule-based 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)
Couldn’t explain 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Rule-based 3 (50%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
Couldn’t explain 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%)
above question. The data indicate that no student in either class could use
the benchmark on the pre-interview. One student in each class applied the
rule-based method. For example, (pre-interview of TH2):
R: Can you tell me the answer for question 6 and your reasoning?
TH2: I think the answer is 2.
R: Can you tell me your reasons?
TH2: Because
4 6 28 30 58 23
+ = + = =1 ,
5 7 35 35 35 35
the answer is close to 2.
R: Can you do it by another way?
TH2: (Hesitate for a while!) I don’t know.
R: How did you know to find the sum of two fractions with different
denominators?
TH2: I learned it at private school.
This kind of question (find the sum of two fractions with different de-
nominators) is not taught until the seventh grade in the Taiwanese new
mathematics curricula. However, TH2 had learned this way at a private
school.
Three (50%) students in the Exp-class and two (33%) students in the
Con-class gave incorrect answers based on rule-methods. For example,
(Pre-interview of TH1):
TEACHING AND LEARNING NUMBER SENSE 127
TABLE VI
Results from fifth grade students’ responses to the following problem
7 or 7 is larger? Why?
8. Without calculating, which one 10 12
7 7
(1) 10 (2) 12 (3) same (4) Without calculating can’t find the answer
Exp-A Con-B
Correct
NS-based 1 (17%) 4 (66%) 4 (66%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Rule-based 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 4 (66%) 4 (66%)
Couldn’t explain 1 (17%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
Incorrect
NS-based 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Rule-based 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
Couldn’t explain 3 (50%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%)
written algorithms. They found the common denominator first and got the
exact answer, then decided on the answer. Two (33%) students continued
to use the same method before and after instruction. For example, (Post-
interview and retention-interview of CL2):
CL2: I don’t know.
As shown in Table VI, students in the Exp-class were not only more
successful on the post- and retention-interviews than the pre-interview in
applying benchmarks (50% vs. 0%) and (66% vs. 0%), but they also used
benchmarks more frequently than students in the Con-class on the post-
and retention-interviews (50% vs. 0%) and (66% vs. 0%).
Table VI presents data from the fifth grader’ responses for the Exp-
7
and Con-class on comparing fractional size: without calculating, is 10 or
7
12
is larger? The fifth graders’ mathematics textbooks in Taiwan do not
teach children to find a least common denominator or cross-product proce-
dure for comparing fractions. The instruction for the Exp-class focused on
developing conceptual understanding through pictorial and verbal repre-
sentations. The textbooks used in the Con-class taught children to compare
fractions by using concrete materials. For example, when comparing 38 and
5
12
, the teacher gave students 24 pieces of chips as a unit and taught them
to find the pieces of 38 and 12
5
. 24 × 38 = 9; 24 × 12
5
= 10, therefore, 12
5
is
larger because it equals 10 pieces of chips.
On the pre-interview, one student (17%) in the Exp-class responded:
“A pizza was cut into 10 pieces and the other pizza was cut into 12 pieces.
TEACHING AND LEARNING NUMBER SENSE 129
Each piece in the 10 pieces group is larger than in the 12 piece group, so
7 7
10
is larger than 12 .” This was coded as number sense-based. No student
in the Con-class could apply a number sense-based method. One student
in the Con-class memorized the rule but was unable to explain his reason.
For example, (Pre-interview of CH1):
R: Can you tell me your answer and reasoning for question 8?
CH1: Since the numerators are the same, and one of the denominators is
smaller, then that fraction is larger.
R: Why is the fraction larger, if the denominator is smaller?
CH1: I don’t know. I memorized the rule I learned in mathematics class.
One student in each class gave the correct answer but they could not pro-
vide an explanation. This was coded as correct and could not explain.
Three (50%) students in the Exp- and two (33%) students in the Con-
class gave incorrect answers and incorrect explanations. For example, (Pre-
interview of TL2):
7 7
TL1: 12 > 10 .
R: Why? Can you tell me your reason?
TL1: Because the numerators are same, I compared the denominators.
7 7
The 12 is larger than 10, hence 12 > 10 .
Or (Pre-interview of CL2)
CL2: I don’t know.
On the post- and retention-interviews, four (66%) students in the Exp-
class applied the number sense methods. One used a meaningful way and
three used pictorial representations to help solve the problem. For example,
(Post-interview of TH1 and TM2):
R: Can you tell me your answer and reasoning for question 8?
TH1: A pizza was cut into 10 pieces and another was cut into 12 pieces.
Each piece in the 10 piece group is larger than in the 12 piece group,
7 7
so 10 is larger than 12 .
Or
7 7
TM2: You see the shaded area of 10
is larger than the shaded area of 12
,
7 7
then 10 > 12 .
7 7
However, no student in the Con-class could compare 10 and 12 in a
meaningful way. Four (66%) students in the Con-class applied rule-based
methods. For example, (Post-interview of CH1 and CH2):
CH1: Since the numerators are the same, I only need to compare denom-
inators. The fraction that has the smaller denominator is the larger
fraction.
130 D.-C. YANG
C ONCLUSION
Although this teaching experiment was implemented over only one se-
mester (about 4 and a half months) and limited to two classes from one
school, the improvement made by the fifth graders in the experimental
class is readily apparent. Though the generalizations of this study are lim-
ited due to the small sample size, the results do provide some important
and interesting findings, as follows:
1. Students’ performance on number sense group tests in both the Exp-
class and the Con-class indicated that there were statistically significant
differences for the scores on the post-tests and retention-tests as compared
with the pretests at the α = 0.01 level. However, the scores for the Exp-
class increased 44% after instruction (the mean score went from 12.35 to
TEACHING AND LEARNING NUMBER SENSE 131
17.81), while the scores for the control class increased only 10% after in-
struction (the mean score went from 11.29 to 12.42). This indicated that the
Exp-class made much more progress on number sense tests as compared
with the Con-class. These data demonstrate that the teaching of number
sense activities is effective and helpful in the development of students’
number sense.
2. In examining the individual interviews of students in the Exp-class
and Con-class on pre-, post-, and retention-interviews, the changes and
progress made by students in the Exp-class is apparent. Students in the
Exp-class were not only able to effectively use number sense strategies
after instruction, but they were also more successful than students in the
Con-class in using number sense strategies to solve problems on the post-
and retention-interviews. The interview results showed that these number
sense activities were effective in helping children develop their number
sense abilities. Furthermore, the results of the retention-interviews further
demonstrated that students’ learning in the Exp-class was meaningful and
therefore long-lasting.
The data from the interviews provide opportunities not only to bet-
ter understand students’ improvement in using number sense strategies,
but also to explore students’ thinking and comprehension of numbers and
operations.
3. There is a major difference between number sense activities designed
for this study and the mathematics textbooks used in Taiwanese classes.
The mathematics textbooks used for the fifth grade level do not teach stu-
dents to find a least common denominator or the cross-product procedure
for comparing fractions. The textbooks teach students to use a unit quantity
to order fractions. For example, when comparing 13 and 38 , the teacher gave
the students 24 pieces of chips as a unit and taught them to find how many
pieces are equivalent to 13 and 38 . The textbooks show that 24 × 13 = 8;
24 × 38 = 9, therefore, 38 is larger due to having 9 pieces of chips. In the
context of this situation, students knew how to order fractions when the
unit was given. However, they were unable to solve the problem if the unit
quantity was not given. On the contrary, the instruction for the Exp-class
focused on the development of conceptual understanding through pictorial
representations. The teacher in the Exp-class encouraged children to draw
diagrams to help them understand fractions and also encourage students to
represent fractions by verbal language. This result is consistent with the
study of Cramer et al. (2002).
4. The use of benchmarks for students in the Exp-class was much more
prevalent after instruction as compared with students in the control class.
The use of benchmarks is not introduced in the Taiwanese textbooks. The-
132 D.-C. YANG
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
R EFERENCES
Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatly, G., Trigatti, B. & Perlwitz, M.
(1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 3–29.
Cockcroft, W.H. (1982). Mathematics Counts. London: HMSO.
Cramer, K.A., Post, T.R. & delMas, R.C. (2002). Initial fraction learning by fourth- and
fifth-grade students: A comparison of the effects of using commercial curricula with
the effects of using the rational number project curriculum. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 33, 111–144.
Fraivillig, J. (2001). Strategies for advancing children’s mathematical thinking. Teaching
Children Mathematics, 454–459.
Greeno, J.G. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 170–218.
Howden, H. (1989). Teaching number sense. Arithmetic Teacher, 36, 6–11.
Hsu, C.Y., Yang, D.C. & Li, F.M. (2001). The design of “The fifth and sixth grade number
sense rating scale”. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 9, 351–374.
Japanese Ministry of Education. (1989). Curriculum of Mathematics for the Elementary
School. Tokyo: Printing Bureau.
Lin, F.L. (1989). Strategies used by adders in proportional reasoning. In Proceedings of
the 13th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2,
Paris, France, pp. 234–241.
Markovits, Z. & Sowder, J.T. (1994). Developing number sense: An intervention study in
grade 7. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 4–29.
McIntosh, A., Reys, B.J. & Reys, R.E. (1992). A proposed framework for examining basic
number sense. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12, 2–8.
McIntosh, A., Reys, B.J., Reys, R.E., Bana, J. & Farrel, B. (1997). Number sense in
school mathematics: Student performance in four countries. Mathematics, Science, and
Technology Education Centre, Edith Cowan University.
Ministry of Education in Taiwan. (2000). Nine-year-integrated mathematics curriculum
standards for national schools from grade 1 to 9 in Taiwan (pp. 19–86). Taiwan: Author
(in Chinese).
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation
standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). The principles and
standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts. A report to the nation on the future
of mathematics education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Ning, T.C. (1992). Child’s meanings of fractional number words, Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Reys, B.J. (1994). Promoting number sense in middle grades. Teaching Mathematics in the
Middle School, 1(2), 114–120.
Reys, R.E. & Yang, D.C. (1998). Relationship between computational performance and
number sense among sixth- and eighth-grade students in Taiwan. Journal for Research
in Mathematics Education, 29, 225–237.
Sowder, J. (1992a). Estimation and number sense. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of
research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–389). New York: Macmillan.
Sowder, J. (1992b). Making sense of numbers in school mathematics. In G. Leinhardt &
R. Hattrup (Eds.), Analysis of arithmetic for mathematics teaching (pp. 1–51). Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
134 D.-C. YANG