TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No.

2-3, 2005 75
doi:10.1093/teamat/hri020

Teacher intervention versus

self-regulated learning?
Dominik Lei

This paper was presented at the 10th International Congress on Mathematical Education in Copenhagen, July 2004

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

Abstract
This paper is a workshop report of an empirical study called DISUM, which deals
with appropriate teacher interventions in the course of students’ independence-
oriented modelling processes. The project aims at developing and investigating
corresponding instructional conceptions, based on an intensive analysis of model-
ling tasks and of students’ learning processes. This is to be realized through a
coordinated programme of task development, evaluation of instruction and analysis
of laboratory and classroom sessions, and also by using tests and questionnaires.
The basis of the evaluation is the empirically substantiated theoretical knowledge
of quality teaching. The main subjects of this article are both the design and ¢rst
results of the explorative preliminary study, which contain a short description of
three exemplary ¢elds of problems when teachers intervene in students’ modelling
processes. Those ¢elds of problems were identi¢ed by analysing eight sessions in
the laboratory, four mathematics lessons and 32 interviews.

1. Educational scenery
The under-average performance of German students when solving demanding tasks and the
deficits of teachers not only in diagnosing but also in handling the students’ problems when
dealing with literacy-oriented tasks as shown by the international studies TIMSS and PISA,
but also the SINUS Project (Steigerung der Effizienz des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen
Unterrichts; see ICME 10 Regular Lecture, Prof. Dr Werner Blum: ‘The SINUS-Project—
‘‘Quality teaching’’ in Mathematics—The SINUS and the DISUM Project’), which is connected
to these, caused an intensive discussion in Germany about creating a so-called ‘new culture of
tasks’.
The discussion is based on the fact that the work on tasks is the most important activity of
students in maths classes (1). Correspondingly the selection, design, handling and assessment of
tasks are the most important activities of teachers. Thus the idea of the new culture of tasks
cannot only consist of a modification of the ‘what’ but also, and particularly, of the ‘how’: the
way teachers and students act in the classroom.
Accordingly the culture of tasks was one of the focuses of the SINUS Project (2,3). The
intended basic competencies were represented by tasks which motivate the students because

The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications.
All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oupjournals.org
76 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

of their connection to life and to application. Furthermore, they can challenge students to solve
problems independently because they are equipped with characteristics such as complexity,
openness and cognitive stimulation. An important part was played by the realistic modelling
tasks (4–6), which were also at the centre of the PISA study (7,8).
SINUS has certainly reached its goal to give a fresh impetus to lessons because of competence-
oriented modelling tasks. Nonetheless, there are still unanswered questions regarding the analysis
of students’ learning processes as well as planning and designing a problem and application
related lesson and in particular those lessons in which the students’ independence is demanded
adequately. Above all this concerns the diagnosis of students’ learning processes and learning
problems and the independence-oriented teacher intervention of the initiation, support and
evaluation of the learning and problem solving processes, which are based on tasks.
However, this is not a specific deficit of SINUS. This lack of knowledge about diagnosis and

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

appropriate interventions can be found worldwide. Only occasionally, and often on a general
level, are there scientific papers about classification and effects of teacher interventions during
classwork and often they differ both in terms and theoretical ideas e.g.:
. Serrano (9) calls a combination of observation and one-to-one-interaction online assessment
with the categories: evaluation, demonstration, providing hints and encouraging thinking
. Chi et al. (10) distinguish between shallow and deep scaffolding episodes by analysing tutoring
. Dekker and Elshout-Mohr (11) divide teacher interventions which aim at helping students into
product and process help
Furthermore, the specific difficulty of reality-related modelling tasks is that every step in
the translation process must be problem and context specific and a simple transfer is not
to be expected (12). This requires special diagnostic and methodical efforts of the teacher. This
is one of the investigative aims of the DISUM (Didaktische Interventionsformen für
einen selbstständigkeitsorientierten aufgabengesteuerten Unterricht am Beispiel Mathematik)
project (13).

2. The DISUM project

2.1. General description
Accordingly, the action of teachers to accompany the students’ solution processes is the focus of
the interdisciplinary DISUM research project at the University of Kassel (W. Blum, R. Messner
and D. Leiss). It aims at developing and investigating corresponding instructional conceptions,
based on an intensive analysis of student’s learning processes, and on the expertise of experienced
SINUS teachers. The subject of the research is mathematics teaching in grade 9, in schools
of all types. The teaching has to be mathematically substantial and cognitively activating, and
has to contribute to improving student’s competencies. This should be achieved, in particular, by
teachers supporting their student’s independent individual learning. As a basis we use the model
(depicted in Fig. 1) of teacher’s relevant functions during task-generated teaching and learning
processes [adapted from Pauli and Reusser (14)].
Subsequent to these investigations there will be experimental studies into effective forms of
diagnosis and intervention that can also be implemented within teacher education. In addition to
the existing theoretical knowledge, the actual teaching process with modelling tasks of so called
SINUS Best-Practice-Teachers with regard to different teacher functions (Fig. 1) and various
criteria of general and mathematics specific quality of lessons (15) are specifically investigated in
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 77

Task based teaching

Knowledge and
Performance of students
social competence

Model specialist competence

aspects of personality
…
Evaluator
The teacher as positive model of learning,
Planner communicating etc.
Co-operative Learning Construction of tasks, creating of
Situation motivational stimulations, structuring,
consideration of personality aspects
Advisor Student Individual adaptive forms of intervention in
co-operative learning situations
Classroom management

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

Instructor
Student Evaluation and correction of results for
Moderator
embedding in subject specific conventions,
processes, nets of concepts

Fig 1. Model of teachers’ relevant functions during task generated teaching and learning processes.

this early project phase. Connected with this preliminary study are several investigation aims,
which can be summarized as explorative investigations by acquiring basic knowledge for task-
directed mathematics teaching (in the sense of a ‘didactical toolbox’):
. construction of a precise catalogue of cognitive demands and analysis of solution processes
for a set of selected modelling tasks;
. findings about accompanying adequate intervention possibilities (Why intervene? When
intervene? How intervene?);
. findings about appropriate didactical methodical teaching elements and their arrangement
all on a medium level of generality, that is not only task specific. These aims have to be realized
through a coordinated programme of task development, evaluation of instruction and analysis
of laboratory and classroom sessions, and also by using tests and questionnaires. The structure
and first results of this exploration phase are contents of this article.

2.2. Explorative preliminary studies

One central situation for teachers interventions in task-based teaching, which aims to keep the
student’s self-regulation, consists of students’ co-operative dealing with tasks [‘co-constructive
solving’, ‘collaborative learning’ (see 16)]. In order to investigate this teaching and learning
situation in detail, we first isolate it from the school context and repeat it in the laboratory.
Furthermore this situation represents an ideal condition in spite of its artificiality (camera,
unknown students or teachers, strange premises) for teacher interventions, because the teacher
needs to focus—as opposed to usual teaching conditions—on just two students and on their
co-constructive solution process. Therefore, the teacher has optimal possibilities for diagnosis
and intervention.
The variables were the relative level of students’ competences (I/II/III/IV, according to PISA’s
used levels of competences) as well as the social form (pairs of students with or without a
teacher); altogether there were eight pairs of students, four with teachers and four without.
78 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

laboratory
O

S1
/2
T
T

I
S1 S2

Fig 2. Phase 1 (left), working at modelling tasks. Phase 2 (right), individual stimulated recall.

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

(To get more detailed findings about the students solving processes and about the influence
of teacher interventions, we observe, in addition, students in the process of task solving without
teacher support.) Following Kagan (17) we used a two-phases design, both phases were
completely filmed (Fig. 2).
In the first phase the students (S1 and S2) were asked to work on four tasks. In case of
problems which they were not able to handle themselves, they were supposed to ask the teacher.
Prior to this laboratory situation, the teacher was acquainted with the task and its possible
solutions. He also obtained a description of his role in this laboratory situation in which he was
supposed to intervene in the problem solving process according to the Montessori principle of
‘help me to do it myself ’. In the second phase, both students and teacher were individually
confronted with the videotaped first phase. At chosen moments of the video an interviewer, who
had observed the first phase (O/I) asked them about their behaviour.
In a second step lesson-similar situations were to be the focus of interest in order to get closer
to teachers’ interventions which are really taking place by means of research methodology. To
do this the teachers had to plan and realize a lesson with their own students, using one of the
modelling tasks which they had used in the laboratory situation. The only condition which was
made due to research methodology was that students had to sit in groups of four. The design
(structure, methodology etc.) of this lesson was entirely left to the teachers. Similar to the
laboratory situation a two-phase design (phase 1, lesson; phase 2, stimulated recall) was applied
here too. One video camera was directed at the teacher (T), a second one filmed only one group
of students, which had been determined by chance in advance (both the position of the camera
and the use of the zoom prevented the students from noticing this design). In all other groups of
students only sounds were recorded (Fig. 3).
After the lesson, two students of the chosen group of four and the teacher took part separately
in video-documented interviews via a stimulated recall. Currently (Spring 2004) all data of the
pre-study has been collected; the main study, which will not be further explained here, is to start
at the end of 2004.
Due to the large amount of data (four analyses of task spaces, eight laboratory situations,
four lessons and 32 interviews) only preliminary results based on the modelling task ‘Filling up’
will be given. The entire evaluation is still in progress. The third section comprises a theo-
retical analysis of the task. The fourth section describes problems identified with coaching
independence-oriented modelling processes.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 79

classroom

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

Fig 3. Classroom working at the modelling task ‘filling up’.

3. Analysing solution processes of modelling tasks

The basis of each specific teacher intervention must be a solid knowledge of demands
(knowledge, skills and competences), the ‘task space’ (18) and specific difficulties of the task
(motivation, complexity of language, possible misconceptions etc.). Thus, it is one aim of the
DISUM project to identify not only problem-solving procedures but also characteristic moments
which can help to develop a heuristic applicable for diagnosis. The following programme has
been designed to achieve this:
. Detailed didactical analysis of the modelling tasks.
. Development of ‘topographies’ based on the structure of activities. (Some activities in the
course of problem solving can directly be observed, others like inner cognitive-linguistic
activities cannot and resulting from this they are hypothetically constructed. Based on the
research material gathered in the laboratory situations, an as comprehensive as possible
description of the structure of the process of single elements of possible problem-solving
processes and their variants are given.)
. Construction of didactical sketches of the observed problem-solving processes
. Revision of analyses of problem-solving processes based on empirical pre-studies and through
experts’ validation and further research.
Based on the example ‘Filling up’ (used in the laboratory situation as well as in the lessons)
in 3.1., first results of I and II are given.
3.1. Didactical analysis of ‘Filling up’
The didactical analysis aims at creating a preliminary theoretical problem solving analysis before
the problem is worked upon to hint at possible obstacles. This includes describing possible ways
to solve the problem, an analysis of different elements of the task, the relevance of the context
and the identification of components of mathematical literacy needed. Based on this a modelling
circle is finally created which ideally categorises the modelling process.

3.1.1. Different ways of solving the problem

When describing possible problem solving processes, two aspects must be considered in
particular. First of all, the models applied may vary considerably (costs, time etc.). In order to
80 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

Filling up
Mister Stone lives in Trier, which is close to the border
of Luxembourg. To fill up his VW Golf, he drives to
Luxembourg where immediately behind the border, 20 km
away from Trier, there is a petrol station. There, you
have to pay 0.85 Euro for one litre of petrol, whereas in
Trier, you have to pay 1.1 Euro.
Is it worthwhile for Mister Stone to drive to Luxembourg?

solve ‘Filling up’, additional aspects like causing further costs (insurance, loss of value, time)

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

or further non-monetary ones like a heightened risk to be involved in an accident, economic loss,
pollution etc. could be considered. Secondly, these aspects, as well as the students’ mathematical
preferences, lead to different possibilities to proceed mathematically. Possible different mathe-
matical procedures [Mr Stone only refuels his car when the petrol is almost used up; only the
direct costs for petrol (40 l) and for the way to Luxembourg (the car uses approximately 8 l per
100 km) are considered] for a real model are described below by giving ideal solutions (in reality
you will hardly ever find only one or the other way; usually both are combined in some way):

(1) Functional solution

Two modelling processes, based on two different functions can be compared here. One is
the costs of filling up the car completely in Trier (40 litre
1.1E/litre ¼ 44E). The other one
results from filling up the car in Luxembourg including the costs of the trip to get there
[(40
8:100) litre
0.85E/litre þ 40 litre
0.85E/litre ¼ 36.72E]. The comparison reveals that
Mr Stone can save approximately 7E by filling up his car in Luxemburg. Thus the answer ought
to be: ‘Yes, it makes sense for him to drive to Luxembourg’.

(2) Algebraic solution

This solution requires no approximations regarding the amount of petrol to be filled up or the
car’s average consumption of petrol. Instead the whole situation can be modelled by means of the
following two variables, where x is the amount of petrol and y is the consumption of petrol in
litres per 100 km:
ð0:85
xÞ þ ½0:85
40
ð y=100Þ 5 ð1:1
xÞ ðcosts Luxembourg5costs TrierÞ
0:34
y 5 0:25
x
y 5 0:74
x ðapproximatelyÞ
The last inequality shows that the car’s consumption must be less than approximately 3/4 of
the petrol filled up. This amount roughly equals the entire capacity of the car in this model.
However, hardly any car can have such a high consumption. Thus, it is worthwhile for Mr Stone
to drive to Luxemburg.

(3) Content-based solution

This is hardly a typical modelling circle, as the solution is based on content-based chain of
arguments which combine both reality and mathematics:
Each litre of petrol obtained in Luxembourg saves roughly 25 cent compared to each one
obtained in Trier. Four litres in Luxemburg save the money for one further litre there.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 81

Consequently, buying approximately 40 litres of petrol in Luxemburg saves Mr Stone enough

money to buy another 10 litres. Conclusion: almost every car needs much less than 10 litres for
the way to and from Luxembourg (40 km) and it makes sense to get petrol in Luxembourg.
Considering further factors when really modelling this problem, e.g. applying the modelling
circle once more in order to evaluate the first solution, may lead to results which vary
considerably from the ones above. For example, they may lead to a changed conclusion that
getting petrol in Trier is far more attractive than initially assumed.

3.1.2. Analysis of different elements of the task

This analysis aims at examining the special structure of the task as well as the function of
the text and, if applicable, its illustrations. This should reveal problems which are related to
the different elements of the task.

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

Structure. Description of the situation (location/protagonist), the way the protagonist acts,
further information about the action, analysing the action.

Text. The text of the task describes an authentic problem situation with one protagonist, a linear
structure of the text and the action, a consistent author’s point of view and an open question
which is focused on the protagonist.
Depending on the specific solution process chosen required information is missing, e.g. the
volume of the tank, consumption, etc.
Describing the distance between Trier and the border to Luxembourg once with ‘close’ and
once with ‘20 km’ increases the difficulties in text comprehension even further.
Visuals. The picture of a petrol pump next to the text does not provide any further information
but serves to illustrate the text and to possibly motivate the students.
The detailed and extensive topographies of the structure of activities (II) serve as a profound
description of how students understand and use the different elements of the task and
accordingly, how they realize the modelling circle. Because the depiction of the topographies
would be too extensive for this article, only a short part of it is shown here (Fig. 4).
ACTIVITIES COGNITIVE-LINGUISTIC
ACTIVITIES
Identifying the real situation
Reading (possible aloud) Identifying the problem/task in
„
the text filling up” paragraph 2, guided by the form of
the question

Identifying the picture as an

Looking at the picture illustration of the
situation described

Reading the text (possible aloud) of

Chosing a reading strategy
“ filling up” focusing on the first
Repetition
paragraph

Identification of the
structure of the text

Fig 4.
82 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

3.1.3. The role of the context

The students examined (year 9, aged 15) are not yet allowed to drive a car. Thus, when
confronted with this task, they need some basic knowledge about the context ‘filling up a car’.
This includes, for example, making realistic estimates about the fuel consumption per 100 km,
the volume of the tank or the depreciation per km. Perhaps gender plays an important role, too,
because in general boys are more interested in this context, and therefore they might be more
motivated to work on the task and might achieve better results.
The students do not need to know other facts, like VW Golf is a car or Luxembourg
is a country which borders on Germany, because they can derive those from the situation
description.

3.1.4. Components of mathematical literacy

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

The task described is an open problem situation, which stimulates cognitive student’s activities,
needs an understanding of both the text and the situation, and requires competencies of
self-regulation and argumentation. Thus, its solution process demands several components of
mathematical literacy:
Basic knowledge
. The solution of the task demands no specific mathematical theorems

Skills
. Applying fundamental rules of arithmetic with real numbers
. Transforming/solving (in-)equations

Working techniques
. Sensible use of the calculator
. To assess/to estimate

Basic concepts of mathematics

. The idea of variables
. Proportional relations

Basic concepts of abilities

. Modelling a complex problem in several stages
. Arguing/giving a reason

3.1.5. Modelling circle

Next, the universal modelling circle (19) is applied to the task ‘filling up’, adapted to it
and extended when necessary. The arrows in this depiction represent the students’ cognitive
processes to achieve specific goals. In the fourth section it is shown which central role they play
for teacher interventions. Relevant steps in the solution process are represented by rectangular
forms.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 83

Reality

4. First results of the preliminary study

identify the meaning
of the task
Filling up
A numberMister
of Stone
problems occurred in the laboratory study as well as in the lessons. [The
lives in Trier, which is
close to the border of Luxemburg. To fill Model of text and situation
differences observed
up his VW Golf, hebetween the laboratory and the lessons- are
drives to Luxemburg neglected
A car here.
can be filled up atOnly two
two petrol
where immediately behind the border, 20 km away stations. One station is near, the other
observations which,
from Trier, there ishowever, have
a petrol station. Therenot
you been
have to examined in detail yet
is 20 km will be your
away from stated.
home.Firstly,
pay 0.85 Euro for one litre of petrol, whereas in Trier, - The prices for the petrol are different. At
teachers in
you the
have laboratory
to pay 1.1 Euro.hardly ever use immanent possibilities of diagnosis
the closer petrol station and they
you have tend
to pay
Is it worthwhile for Mister Stone to drive to more to fill up.
to interactLuxemburg?
with the students as they are used to doing this in- their lessons.toSecondly,
Is it worthwhile drive to the in the
petrol
station, which is further away?
lessons the student-groups of four achieve significantly better results than in the two-partner

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

groups in the laboratory. This is independent
to verify to idealize/structur
of the competenc y levels.] Some of these can
be found, on a general level, in the literature, but they were not interpreted for specific
Real result Real model
„ „
situations(1)orInfor
this specific subjects:
model it is more expensive to fill - “ worthwhile can be translated with “is cheaper (but it is
up the car in Trier than in Luxemburg. possible to consider other factors; e.g. time, pollution,
probability of an accident, depreciation … )
(2) If the relation between the filled in petrol
• and the consumption is … , then it is
Dealing with students’ mistakes
cheaper to drive to Luxemburg.
Problem: If Mister Stone drives to Luxemburg, he incurs
additional costs. What is higher: the costs, or the money he
saved by filling up in Luxemburg?
(3) …
- The basic model considers only the different costs for filling
• Validity of the solution up and the price for the petrol needed to drive to
Luxemburg

• Influence of the students’ interaction

• Length and frequency of teacher intervention

to interpret the
mathematical result
in the situation of task to translate
• … in to mathematics

Mathematics
In the following we focus on three selected aspects: teacher interventions before,
during and after the students’ independence-oriented solution. This is because several
‘general’ fields of problems originated too (disturbances from outside the classroom, time-
Mathematical model
Mathematical result
limit of the lesson etc.). Each of the following three fields
The result depends on the mathematical
Two of problems
exemplary refers
ways of to are
solution thepresented,
working
because the mathematical model depends on the
model used: real model, the cognitive preferences of the students
on the task ‘Filling up’.
(1) Costs in Luxemburg: 36.72 etc. (x petrol filled in / y: consumption):
Costs in Trier: 44 (x, y are estimated) (1) Comparison of two models
(2) y < 0.74 · x Costs in Trier = x ·1.1
(3) … Costs in Luxemburg = y/2.5 · 0.85 + x · 0.85
4.1. Developing a real model (2) Modelling the whole situation
0.85 · x + 0.85 · (y/2.5) < 1.1 · x
(3) …
Situation 1 (lesson situation, Gymnasium)
to apply
mathematical rules
At the beginning of the lesson the teacher, S, presents the task ‘filling up’ to all students by
to activate adequate
using an overhead projector and Inner
readsmathematical competences competence
it aloud to them. Then she names the task: ‘Everyone
(1) To solve an equation with one or two
variables
think about some pro and contra arguments, maybe from different points of view: Mr Stone
(2) To solve an inequation
is a student, Mr Stone is a pensioner,
(3) … Mr Stone is a doctor or something else. Be creative.’
84 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

4. First results of the preliminary study

A number of problems occurred in the laboratory study as well as in the lessons. [The
differences observed between the laboratory and the lessons are neglected here. Only two
observations which, however, have not been examined in detail yet will be stated. Firstly,
teachers in the laboratory hardly ever use immanent possibilities of diagnosis and they tend to
interact with the students as they are used to doing this in their lessons. Secondly, in the lessons
the student-groups of four achieve significantly better results than in the two-partner groups in
the laboratory. This is independent of the competency levels.] Some of these can be found, on
a general level, in the literature, but they were not interpreted for specific situations or for specific
subjects:
. Dealing with students’ mistakes

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

. Validity of the solution
. Influence of the students’ interaction
. Length and frequency of teacher intervention
. ...
In the following we focus on three selected aspects: teacher interventions before, during and
after the students’ independence-oriented solution. This is because several ‘general’ fields of
problems originated too (disturbances from outside the classroom, time-limit of the lesson etc.).
Each of the following three fields of problems refers to the working on the task ‘Filling up’.

4.1. Developing a real model

Situation 1 (lesson situation, Gymnasium)

At the beginning of the lesson the teacher, S, presents the task ‘filling up’ to all students by using
an overhead projector and reads it aloud to them. Then she names the task: ‘Everyone think
about some pro and contra arguments, maybe from different points of view: Mr Stone is a
student, Mr Stone is a pensioner, Mr Stone is a doctor or something else. Be creative.’

Situation 2 (lesson situation, Gymnasium)

A French exchange student asks the teacher:
Student: ‘What does worthwhile mean?’
Teacher, M: ‘Worthwhile means whether it is financially sensible for him to drive across the
border to fill up his car. Yes? Is the question okay?’
Student: ‘Is it cheaper then?’
Teacher M.: ‘Yes, exactly. Whether it is cheaper for him to drive across the border.’

Situation 3 (lesson situation, Gesamtschule)

During the final presentation of the results one student says that the teacher had told him how
expensive one kilometre with a car really is, if all expenses are considered. While the other
students complain that they did not get this piece of information, the teacher replies: ‘I have
always only answered questions you actually asked me.’
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 85

The laboratory studies show that the students do not really put themselves into the problem
situation; they just wanted to solve the (obvious) task. Consequently, all students in the
laboratory only considered the costs for the petrol and the drive to Luxembourg, when they
developed their real model (called the basic model).
In the lesson situations described it is apparent how different teachers deal with the problem. In
the first situation, a further aspect is suggested to the students, namely the different valuation
of the time required. As a result, however, all the groups only worked on this aspect. Only one
group was encouraged by this to name further arguments, e.g. patriotism, which is unusual in
mathematic lessons. In the second situation the teacher herself has a limited view of the concept
‘worthwhile’, so she mainly supports this while coaching the groups and considers arguments
from students, e.g. the time, to be less relevant. In the third situation the teacher only commented
on this when he was asked a specific question. Thus, as in the laboratory sessions, primarily the

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

basic model was presented as a solution.
The three situations described above generate a demand for adequate teacher intervention.
This can probably generally be applied to developing real models for modelling tasks. An
adequate teacher intervention could be to involve students better in the situation, for example
with a role play or the mere challenge to put themselves mentally into the specific situation. The
benefit of that is that all students would be stimulated to develop a sophisticated real model,
possibly after a first run through the basic model. The advantage would be that this real model
would not be restricted to the aspects named by the teacher.

4.2. The problem of students’ previous knowledge

Situation 4 (laboratory situation, two moderate female students, Gymnasium)
The students turn to the teacher because they do not know how much petrol a car consumes.
Then a socratic dialogue between teacher and students develops with questions like: ‘How much
does a car like that fill up at the petrol station?’ and ‘How far does it drive with that?’ Until the
students know how much a car consumes, several minutes have passed. In the interviews
afterwards both students complain about the teacher not having given them enough support.

Situation 5: (laboratory situation, two high-performance female students, Gymnasium)

Connected to the question of the volume of a tank the following dialogue took place:
Student 1: ‘I don’t know how much you can put in such a VW Golf. [. . .]’
Teacher: ‘How much can you put in the tank approximately?’
Student 2: ‘Ehh 20 litres, I don’t know.’
Teacher: ‘Twenty litres might be a little bit too little. We’ll take 50 litres.’
One problem with almost all application related modelling tasks is dealing with—in this case
missing—real life knowledge. Already the solution process analysis made us assume that the
knowledge about a car’s consumption and the volume of its tank is a problem to all students
regardless of their gender. This phenomenon applies to both laboratory and lesson situations.
There were, as the two examples show, very different reactions of the teachers to this. In the first
situation it takes almost 10 minutes till the students have closed their knowledge gaps more or
less on their own. In the second case this only takes 31 seconds. If you just watch at this single
laboratory session, it may seem more appropriate to just tell the students the lacking pieces of
86 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

knowledge, so that they can continue with their modelling processes. For the long-term tutoring
of students, helping them to find a basic attitude towards making missing knowledge elements
accessible, preferably on their own, seems more suitable. However, ‘on their own’ should not
be confused with ‘alone’. As a result, according to Vygotsky’s ‘zone of proximal development’,
a teacher should not demand too much from his students not only because this might reduce
the students’ motivation.

4.3. Reflections on the solution process

Situation 6 (lesson situation, Hauptschule)
The teacher discusses different solutions in the whole class and writes them on the blackboard.
One student dictates him the price 2.805E for the trip from Trier to Luxemburg. The teacher

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

writes 2.8 on the blackboard and the following conversation develops:
Teacher: ‘2.805E. How much do you pay?’
A few students: ‘2.85’
Student: ‘2.81’
Teacher: ‘2.81’ (changes 2.8 to 2.81E on the blackboard.)

Situation 7 (laboratory situation, two female students, Gymnasium)

The students used the basic model for the solution of the task. In the end the teacher asks them if
this solution is helpful for every car driver. The students answer this depends on the volume of
the tank and its consumption assumed. The teacher finishes the working on the task with that.

Situation 8 (lesson situation, Gymnasium)

During the group working phase a student confronts the teacher with the problem that they make
various assumptions for the consumption in the groups:
Student: ‘Ah, that’s quite strange, if we now say, let’s assume eight (-) eight litres and if they
now say in another group, for example, six or seven litres. Then everyone will have another
result. Do we not all need the same?’
Teacher: ‘That’s again one of those tasks where you also can, depending on your assumptions,
get to different solutions.’
In the presentation phase at the end of the lesson this theme is not picked up.
For a (further) development of meta-cognitive students’ abilities it is necessary to work
through professional contents. This includes extracting relevant term-schematic and process-
strategic signs both methodically and by means of abstracting (20). In all three cases some
reflections take place, but without reaching the core of the problem. So the teacher in the sixth
situation deals with the problem that you cannot pay fractions of a cent and because of that you
have to round the value. However, he does not discuss that assumption of the accuracy, given
that volume of the tank and consumption can never lead to an accuracy of two decimal places in
the result. This, though, would be important—even in the context with under-defined modelling
tasks—to explicit mathematically relevant facts during the presentation of results.
Nevertheless, solutions obtained in this way are utilizable in reality due to the fact that it is,
at least when applying the basic model, almost irrelevant which estimates were made for the tank
volume and the consumption. To further discuss this fact—e.g. by using the algebraic approach
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 87

(see 3.1.1)—particularly in situation 8, in which all students of that class achieved similar results
by using the basic model, would have been appropriate in a final reflection phase. However, such
a reflection was not observed in any of the lessons or laboratory sessions.

5. Concluding remarks
The three examples of the previous section illustrate that a teacher must fulfill a very complex
task when combining appropriate teacher interventions and students’ self-regulated learning
processes. Considering the conclusions of the preliminary study makes this even clearer.
According to that a teacher mainly has the possibility to intervene

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

. in different phases (before, during and after the solution process/the specific lesson),
. at different points of time (e.g. in the moment when a failure occurs or only after an indefinite
time when the student has the chance to correct his failure and the teacher to diagnose),
. on different levels (e.g. mathematical content, meta/strategy-level, social interaction),
. with a variety of methods (e.g. questions, demonstrations, hint cards),
. with different degrees of directness of his prompts (from hidden hints to unambiguous
instructions).
Finally, a teacher’s help results from his own wish to intervene or a student might ask for help.
Regarding the complexity of this topic and the fact that the DISUM project can only
marginally profit from other findings (see section 1) it is important that on the basis of a detailed
analysis of the task and (imaginable) solution processes it seems to be possible to provide a
multidimensional classification of teacher interventions and their effects on group processes (21).
The described exemplary fields of problems should not be viewed as negative examples, but as
identified important key ‘situations’ for/of the solution process. As much in the laboratory as in
the classroom, we observed teacher interventions in those key situations, which keep the students’
independence and help them to overcome difficulties. So far we have specified, among other
things, the following teacher interventions which seem to be successful for helping students
during independence-oriented working at modelling tasks corresponding to the findings of
section 3:
. It is necessary that the teacher ensures that the students put themselves mentally into the
specific situation. Then it is easier for them to create an appropriate real model of the given
problem.
. Application of mathematics to realistic/authentic tasks in the classroom implies that the
students have already or still need some special pieces of real life knowledge. So it is important
that the teacher supports the students to find a basic attitude towards getting access to missing
knowledge elements.
. For reaching the core of a problem the students should always be encouraged to reflect upon
their solution process. This concludes not only the used mathematical elements but also the
modelling cycle, learning strategies or the social/communicative group processes.
These still are relatively general pieces of advice for teacher interventions. However, it is the
aim of this project to give both a more specific and a more extended characterisation of teacher
interventions in the course of students’ modelling processes. Consequently, the next steps of the
DISUM project include further interpretation of the laboratory and teaching notes obtained,
particularly of the interviews and questionnaires. Based on those, there will be an extended
88 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005

exploration phase in 2004/2005 and a quantitative study in 2006 to achieve the aims described
in section 2.

References
1. Christiansen, B. & Walther, G. (1986) Task and activity. In Houson, A. G. & Otte, M. (eds),
Perspectives on mathematics education. Dodrecht: Reidel, pp. 243–307.
2. Blum, W., Fey, S., Huber-Söllner, E. et al. (2000) Gute Unterrichtspraxis: Steigerung der Effizienz des
mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts. Pro Schule, Heft 3.
3. Prenzel, M. (2000) Steigerung der Effizienz des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrrichts: Ein
Modellversuchsprogramm von Bund und Ländern. Unterrichtswissenschaft 28 (Heft 2), pp. 103–126.

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015

4. Blum, W., Alsua, C., Biembengut, M. S. et al. (2002) ICMI Study 14: Applications and Modelling
in Mathematics Education – Discussion Document. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51, 149–171.
5. Henn, H.-W. (2002) Modellieren. Mathematik Lehren, 113.
6. Kaiser, G. (1995) Realitätsbezüge im Mathematikunterricht. Ein überblick über die aktuelle
und historische Diskussion. Materialien für einen realitätsbezogenen Mathematikunterricht. Kassel.
Band 2, pp. 66–84.
7. Baumert, J., Klieme, E., Neubrand, M. et al. (2001) Die Lösung mathematischer Aufgaben als
Modellierungsprozess. In Deutsches PISA-Konsortium (ed.). Pisa 2000 – Basiskompetenzen von
Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich. Opladen, pp. 143–149.
8. Neubrand, M., Biehler, R., Blum, W. et al. (2001) Grundlagen der Ergänzung des internationalen
PISA-Mathematik-Tests in der deutschen Zusatzerhebung. ZDM, 22, 45–59.
9. Serrano, A. M. (1996) Opportunities for online assessment during mathematics classroom Instruction.
Los Angeles (Dissertation).
10. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H. et al. (2001) Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science,
25, 471–533.
11. Dekker, R. & Elshout-Mohr, M. (2004) Teacher interventions aimed at mathematical level raising
during collaborative learning. Educational Studies, 56, 39–65.
12. Niss, M. (1999) Aspects of the nature and state of research in mathematics education. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 40, 1–24.
13. Blum, W. & Leiss, D. (2003) Diagnose- und Interventionsformen für einen selbstständigkeitsorientierten
Unterricht am Beispiel Mathematik – Vorstellung des Projekts DISUM. Hildesheim: Beiträge zum
Mathematikunterricht, pp. 129–132.
14. Pauli, C. & Reusser, K. (2000) Zur Rolle der Lehrperson beim kooperativen Lernen. Schweizerische
Zeitschrift für Bildungswissenschaften, 3, 421–441.
15. Helmke, A. (2003) Unterrichtsqualität erfassen, bewerten, verbessern. Kallmeyer Verlag, Seelze.
16. Dillenbourg, P. (ed.) (1999) Collaborative Learning (Advances in learning and instruction series),
Elsevier Science: Amsterdam.
17. Kagan, N., Krathwohl, D. R., Miller, R. et al. (1963) Stimulated recall in therapy using video-tape –
A case study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 10, 237–243.
18. Newell, A. & Simon, H. (1972) Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. Pollak, H. O. (1979) The interaction between mathematics and other school subjects. New trends in
mathematics teaching. Paris: ICMI VI, pp. 232–248.
 TEACHING MATHEMATICS AND ITS APPLICATIONS Volume 24, No. 2-3, 2005 89

20. Reusser, K. (1998) Denkstrukturen und Wissenserwerb in der Ontogenese. In Klix, F. & Spada, H.
(eds), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie. Themenbereich C: Theorie und Forschung. Series II: Kognition.
Volume G: Wissenspsychologie. Göttingen: Hogrefe, pp. 115–166.
21. Dann, H.-D., Diegritz, T. & Rosenbusch, H. S. (1999) Gruppenunterricht im Schulalltag. Erlangen:
Realität und Chancen.

Dominik Leiß is a research assistant in the field of mathematics education at the University of Kassel
(Germany). He is engaged in modelling tasks, teacher interventions in students’ solution processes and
the German educational standards for mathematics in middle schools.

Address for correspondence: Universität Kassel, Heinrich-Plett-Strasse 40, 34132 Kassel, Germany.
Tel. þ 49 561 804 4308; E-mail: dleiss@mathematik.uni-kassel.de

Downloaded from http://teamat.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Bath on June 7, 2015