LEARNING UNIT 3

TEACHING AND LEARNING STRATEGIES RELEVANT TO THE TEACHING OF

MATHEMATICS

Contents

LEARNING UNIT 3

3.1 Introduction

Understanding concepts related to the teaching and learning of FET

3.2
mathematics

3.3 The construction of ideas

3.4 Rote learning

3.5 How understanding takes place

3.6 Strategies for effective teaching

3.7 Conclusion

3.8 Self-assessment

Lesson outcomes
After reading this Lesson and engaging in the activities, you should be able to:
• Identify concepts related to the teaching and learning of FET mathematics
• Understand how learners construct ideas
• Use different teaching strategies

3.1. Introduction
In recent years there has been an interesting move away from the idea that teachers can
best help their learners to learn mathematics by deciding in what order and through what
steps new material should be presented. It has become a commonly accepted goal among
mathematics educators that learners should be enabled to understand mathematics.
 • A widely accepted theory, known as constructivism, suggests that learners must
be active participants in the development of their own understanding.
• Each learner, it is now believed, constructs his/her own meaning in his/her own
special way.
• This happens as learners interact with their environment, process different
experiences and build on the knowledge (or schema) that they already have.
• Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism and sociocultural theories have
influenced the way we teach mathematics. Learning theories offer tools or lenses
which we can use to interpret how learners learn (Simon, 2017). In this learning
unit, the focus is on the theory of constructivism, and its implications for teaching
mathematics.

3.2. Concepts in the teaching and learning of FET

mathematics
In Mathematics Education, Njisane (1992) explains that learners never mirror or reflect
what they are told or read: it is in the nature of the human mind to look for meaning and
to find regularity in events in the environment, whether or not suitable information is
available. The verb ‘to construct’ implies that the mental structures (schemas) a learner
ultimately possesses, are built up gradually from separate components, in a manner
which initially differs from that of an adult. Also, read these two articles, and make your
own notes on teaching mathematics for understanding:

https://pythagoras.org.za/index.php/pythagoras/article/view/109
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337258_Maths_concepts_in_teaching_P
rocedural_and_conceptual_knowledge

Constructivism derives from the cognitive school of psychology and the theories of Jean
Piaget and Lev Vygotsky. It first began to influence the educational world in the 1960s.
More recently, the ideas of constructivism have spread and gained strong support
throughout the world, in countries such as Britain, Australia and many others.
In South Africa, the constructivist theory of mathematics learning has been strongly
supported by researchers, teachers and the education department. The so-called
problem-centred approach is based on constructivist principles. CAPS also promotes a
constructivist approach to teaching and learning mathematics (as you will have seen in
Learning unit 1), particularly in the section focusing on the action words used when doing
maths.

Constructivism provides teachers with insights into how learners learn mathematics, and
guides them in using instructional strategies developmentally, i.e., beginning with the
learners, not with themselves as teachers. In this learning unit, the focus is on
understanding mathematics from a constructivist perspective and reaping the benefits of
a relational understanding of mathematics, that is, linking procedural and conceptual
knowledge to lay the foundations of a developmental approach. The Lesson will also
elaborate on the constructivist view of learning, giving examples of constructed learning
and an understanding of mathematics.

3.3. The construction of ideas

A key idea of constructivism is simply this: children construct their own knowledge. It is
not just children who do this – everyone is involved, all the time, in making meaning and
constructing their own understanding of the world.

The constructivist approach views the learner as someone with a certain level of
knowledge in his/her brain, not as an empty vessel that must be filled with information.
A learner thus adds new knowledge to his/her existing body of knowledge by making
sense of what is already inside his/her head. We, therefore, infer that the constructivist
process is one in which individuals try to organise, structure and restructure their
experiences in the light of the schemes of thought available to them. In the process, these
schemes are modified or changed. Njisane (1992) explains that concepts, ideas, theories
and models, as individual constructs in the mind, are constantly being tested by
individual experiences, but that they last as long as they are being interpreted by the
individual. No lasting learning will take place unless the learner is actively involved in
constructing his/her knowledge.

Piaget (Farrell, 1980) insists that knowledge is active, that is, knowing an idea or object
requires that the learner manipulate it physically or mentally, and thereby transform (or
modify) it. According to this approach, when you want to solve a problem relating to
finance – at home, at the garage or at church – you will spontaneously and actively
interact with the characteristics of a real situation that you see as relevant to your
problem.

A banker, faced with a business problem, may ‘turn it over in his mind’; he may prepare
charts or look over relevant data; and he may confer with colleagues: in doing so, he
transforms a set of ideas in a combination of symbolic and concrete ways, and so
understands or ‘knows’ the problem.

The tools we use to build understanding are our existing ideas and the knowledge we
already possess. The materials we act on to build understanding may include things we
see, hear or touch: in other words, elements of our physical world. Sometimes the
materials are our own thoughts and ideas on which we build our mental constructs. The
effort which a learner must put in, is to give a problem active and reflective thought. If the
learner's mind is not actively thinking, nothing happens.

To construct and understand a new idea, you must think actively about it. Mathematical
ideas cannot be ‘poured into’ the inactive mind of a passive learner. A learner must be
encouraged to wrestle with new ideas, to work at fitting them into his/her existing
networks of ideas, and to challenge his/her own ideas, as well as those of others.

Van de Walle (2016) aptly uses the term ‘reflective thought’ to explain how learners
actively think about, or mentally work on, an idea: “Reflective thought means sifting
through existing ideas to find those that seem to be the most useful in giving meaning to
the new idea.”
Through reflective thought, we create an integrated network of connections between
ideas (also referred to as cognitive schemas). As we are exposed to more information or
experiences, those networks are added to (or changed), so our cognitive or mental
schemas are always being modified to include new ideas.

Here is a critical question for the teacher who wants to teach for understanding: How can
you construct lessons to promote appropriate, reflective thought on the part of your
learners?

Purposeful mental engagement or reflective thought about the ideas we want students to
develop is crucial to effective teaching. If learners do not think actively about the
important concepts of a lesson, learning simply will not take place. How can we make it
happen?

Van de Walle (2016) provides the following seven effective suggestions to empower
teachers to teach developmentally:

1 Create a mathematical environment

2 Pose worthwhile mathematical tasks
3 Use cooperative learning groups
4 Use models and calculators as thinking tools
5 Encourage discourse and writing
6 Require justification of learners' responses
7 Listen actively.

Constructivism
Jean Piaget developed the theory of constructivism, based on the belief that learners are
not blank slates, but construct their own knowledge and learning. In South Africa,
mathematics learning is supported by constructivist principles, and the problem-based
approach is used in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Constructivism provides
teachers with insights into how learners learn mathematics, and guides them in using
instructional strategies developmentally.
A constructivist view of learning
The constructivist view requires teachers to shift from the traditional approach of direct
teaching, to the facilitation of learning. Constructivism rejects the notion that learners are
largely ignorant, with no ideas, concepts or mental structures. The argument made here,
is that learners do not absorb the ideas of their teachers – they are the creators of their
own knowledge. The constructivist approach sees learners as already having mastered a
certain level of knowledge, to which they can add new knowledge by making sense of
what has already been learned. The role of the teacher is therefore to infer, using the
constructive process, and that of the learner is to organise, structure and restructure
his/her own experiences, using the available schemes of thought. Remember that the
restructuring process means that a learner’s schemes will be modified or changed.

Activity 3.1

Consider the following:

1 Develop a network of connections between existing ideas.
2 Add the new idea.
3 Draw connecting lines between existing and new ideas (used and formed during
the acquisition of the skill).

Feedback for Activity 3.1

Cognitive schema: a network of connections between ideas
In grades 10–12, learners develop the skill of drawing and interpreting graphs of
functions. These graphs include the straight line, parabolic, hyperbolic, exponential,
logarithmic, trigonometric and cube graphs. Your task is to develop a cognitive
schema for newly emerging concepts (or rules) from grades 10–12, for the different
graphs mentioned earlier.

Principles of constructivism
The general principles of constructivism, which are based largely on the work of Piaget,
imply that when a person interacts with an experience/situation/idea, one of two things
happens: either the new experience is integrated into his/her existing schemata (a
process called assimilation) or the existing schemata have to be adapted to
accommodate the new idea/experience (a process called adaptation).
• Assimilation refers to the use of an existing schema to give meaning to new
experiences. It is based on the learner’s ability to notice similarities among
objects, and to match new ideas to those s/he already holds.
• Accommodation is the process of altering existing ways of seeing things or
ideas that do not fit into existing schemata. It is facilitated by reflective thought,
and results in the changing or modification of existing schemata.

The following activity will help you work through these ideas, using a mathematical
example.

• Activity 3.2

Understanding misconceptions and mental constructs

Daniel, a learner in Grade 11, gives the following incorrect response:

𝒙+𝟏
a) > 0 implies that x + 1 > 0 and thus x > − 1
𝒙

1 Explain the conceptual error Daniel made.

2 What mental construct (or idea) does Daniel need to modify to overcome this
misconception? (Multiplying an inequality by a negative number.)
3 Describe a useful constructive activity that Daniel could engage in to correct the
misconception.
What kind of process takes place as a result of ’Daniel's mental construct being
modified – is it accommodation or assimilation? Explain your answer.

Feedback for Activity 3.2

Mathematics learning is likely to happen when we
• use activities that build on learners’ experiences;
• use activities that learners regard as powerful and interesting;
• provide feedback to learners;
• use and develop correct mathematical language;
 • challenge learners within a supportive framework; and
• encourage learner collaboration, consensus and decision making.

Activity 3.3

Find five examples of typical errors that you are aware of that your learners made in
grades 10–12 mathematics. Write them down and analyse them, by looking for
conceptual errors. The examples should include errors from algebra, trigonometry and
geometry.

Feedback for Activity 3.3

When learners construct their own conceptual understanding of what they are being
taught, they will not always produce solutions that look similar. The teacher needs to be
open to evaluating those solutions as they are presented. Computational proficiency and
speed are not always the goal. Rather, confidence, understanding and a belief in their
ability to solve a problem, should also be valued.

3.4. Rote learning

All that you have read so far shows that learning and thinking cannot be separated from
each other – especially in mathematics. In many classrooms, reflective thought (or active
thinking) is still often replaced by rote learning, with the focus on the acquisition of
specific skills, facts and the memorising of information, rules and procedures, most of
which are very soon forgotten, once the immediate need for their retention has passed.

A learner needs information, concepts and ideas, or a network of connected ideas, to

think. S/he will think according to the knowledge already at his/her disposal (cognitive
schemata). The dead weight of facts which are learnt off by heart, by rote and without
thought to meaning, robs the learner of the potential excitement of relating ideas or
concepts to one another, and the possibility of divergent and creative thinking
(Grossmann, 1986).
Constructivism is a theory about how we learn. Yes, even rote learning is a construction,
but the tools or ideas used for construction in rote learning, are minimal. You may well
ask: to what is knowledge which is learned by rote, connected? What is inflicted on
children as a result of rote-memorised rules, in many cases, is the manipulation of
symbols which have little or no attached meaning.

This makes learning much more difficult, because rules are harder to remember than
integrated conceptual structures which are made up of a network of connected ideas. In
addition, careless errors are not picked up, because the task has no meaning for the
learner and so s/he has not anticipated the kind of result that may emerge.

According to the stereotypical, traditional view, mathematics is regarded as a “tool

subject”, consisting of a series of computational skills: the rote learning of skills is all-
important, with speed and accuracy the criteria for measuring learning.

Numerous weaknesses are inherent to this approach of rote learning:

• Learners perform poorly, neither understanding nor enjoying the subject.
• They are unable to apply what they have learned to new situations.
• They soon forget what they have learned.
• Learning occurs in a vacuum – the link to the real world is rarely made.
• Little attention is paid to the needs, interests and development of the learner.
• Knowledge learned by rote is seldom connected to the learner’s existing ideas
(that is, his/her cognitive schemata), so no useful cognitive networks are formed,
and each newly formed idea is isolated.
• Rote learning will almost never contribute to a useful network of ideas.
• Rote learning can be thought of as a ‘weak construction’.

Activity 3.4

Rote learning
In what way can rote learning in a mathematics class be beneficial? Give an example for
each grade (10, 11 and 12) where rote learning can be applied.
Feedback for Activity 3.4:
Rote learning has a role to play, especially in learning basic concepts. The teacher needs
to be aware of this role in order to apply it where necessary.

3.5 How understanding takes place

We are now able to say what we mean by understanding. For Grossman (1986),
understanding something means being able to assimilate it into an appropriate schema
(cognitive structure). Recall that assimilation refers to the use of an existing schema (or
a network of connected ideas) to give meaning to new experiences and ideas. Note that
the assimilation of information or ideas to an inappropriate (faulty, confusing or
incorrect) schema will make the assimilation to later ideas more difficult and, in some
cases, even impossible (depending on how inappropriate the schema is).

Grossmann (1986) cites another obstacle to understanding: the belief that one already
understands fully. Learners are often unaware that they have not understood a concept
until they try to put it into practice. How often has a teacher given a class several similar
problems to do (after demonstrating a number process on the blackboard), only to find
that several children cannot solve the problems? Those children thought that they
understood, but did not. The situation becomes just as problematic when a schema is
absent: that means there is no schema to assimilate to, just a collection of memorised
rules and facts. For teachers in the intermediate phase, the danger lies in the fact that
mechanical computation can obscure the fact that schemata are not being constructed or
built up, especially in the first few years – this will be to the detriment of the learners’
understanding in later years.

Understanding can be thought of as a measure of the quality and quantity of connections

that one idea forms with existing ideas. Understanding depends on the existence of
appropriate ideas and the creation of new connections. The greater the number of
appropriate connections to a network of ideas, the better the understanding will be. A
person’s understanding exists along a continuum: at one pole, an idea is associated with
many others in a rich network of related ideas. This is the pole of so-called ‘relational
understanding‘. At the other pole, ideas are loosely connected or isolated from each other.
This is the pole of so-called ‘instrumental understanding’. Knowledge learned by rote
is almost always at the pole of instrumental understanding, where ideas are nearly
always isolated and disconnected.

Grossman (1986) draws attention to one of Piaget’s teaching and learning principles: the
importance of the child learning through his/her own discovery. When learners come to
knowledge through self-discovery, that knowledge has more meaning because
discovery facilitates the process of building cognitive structures (constructing a network
of connected ideas). The recall of information (concepts, procedures) is easier than the
recall of unrelated knowledge which has been transmitted to the learner. Through the
process of discovery (or investigation), a learner undergoes a process of grasping the
basic relations (or connections) of an event while discarding irrelevant relations, and so
s/he arrives at a concept (idea) together with an understanding of the relations that
give that concept meaning. The learner can, therefore, proceed to handle and cope with a
good deal of meaningful new (but highly related) information.

We infer from the above that the learner arrives at a concept that is derived from a
schema (a network of connected ideas), rather than from the direct instruction of the
teacher. This produces the kind of learner who is independent, able to think, to express
ideas and solve problems. This represents a shift to learner centeredness, where learners
are knowledge developers and users, rather than storage systems and performers
(Grossman, 1986).

Activity 3.5

Relational and instrumental understanding

1 Explain the difference between relational and instrumental understanding.
2 Explain why relational understanding has far greater potential for promoting
reflective thinking than instrumental understanding.
3 Explain what it means to say that understanding exists on a continuum, from
relational to instrumental. Give an example of a mathematical concept, and explain
how it might be understood at different places along this continuum.
4 Explain the difference between the use of a rule, an algorithm or an idea, and the
thinking strategies, processes and concepts used to construct a solution (or a new
idea).

Examples of understanding
Understanding is about being able to connect ideas, rather than simply knowing isolated
facts. The question ‘Does the learner know it?’ must be replaced with ‘How well does the
learner understand it?’ The first question refers to instrumental understanding, while
the second leads to relational understanding. Memorising rules and using recipe-type
methods diligently in computations is evidence of a learner knowing the idea. Where the
learner connects a network of ideas to form a new idea and arrive at a solution, this is
evidence of him/her understanding the idea, and it contributes to our understanding of
how learners understand.

Study these attempts by Grade 11 learners to solve a quadratic equation:

Learner A (x − 4)(x − 1) = 10
x = 4 or x = 1

Learner B (x − 4)(x − 1) = 10

x − 4 = 10 or x − 1= 10

x = 14 or x = 11

Learner C (x − 4)(x − 1) = 10

x2 −5x + 4 = 10

x 2 −5x − 6 = 0

(x − 3)(x − 2) = 0

x = 3 or x = 2

Learner D x2 −5x + 4 = 10
 x 2 −5x − 6 = 0

(x − 6)(x + 1) = 0

x = 6 and x = −1

Reflect on the thought processes at the different places along the understanding
continuum (that is, the continuous closing of ‘gaps’ to try to understand an idea).

E D C B A

Relational Instrumental
understanding Connection of a network of ideas understanding

Idea A: Instrumental understanding − concept is isolated, vague or flawed

Idea B:
Idea C:
Idea D:
Idea E: Relational understanding

Activity 3.6

Continuum of understanding

1 Where would you place the learners (learner A-D) in the above example (ideas A–E)
on the continuum of understanding?

2 What would you tell each learner, to rectify his/her misconception(s)?

3 Draw a mind map to solve the quadratic equation and show how the concepts are
interrelated.

4 Read the article by Alwyn Olivier, “Handling pupils’ misconceptions”, in which he

explains how misconceptions can come from previously “correct learning”.

http://academic.sun.ac.za/mathed/MALATI/Files/Misconceptions.pdf
Feedback for Activity 3.6:

This kind of analysis of the steps learners could follow when answering a question can
help you, as the teacher, to help them overcome their difficulties and misunderstandings.
There is no ‘magic wand’ that you can wave to make problems go away. Each individual
learner will need attention and help at the point at which s/he is experiencing difficulties,
and you will need to be able to identify where s/he needs help and take it from there.

Relational understanding can be beneficial to the learner in different ways.

The effects may be summarised as follows. It:

• promotes self-reliance and self-esteem;

• promotes confidence to tackle new problems;
• reduces anxiety and pressure;
• develops an honest understanding of concepts;
• guides learners not to rely on interpretive learning, but on the construction of
knowledge;
• helps learners to develop investigative and problem-solving strategies;
• benefits learners in that they do not forget knowledge they have constructed; and
• helps learners to enjoy mathematics.

There is no reason to fear or be in awe of knowledge which is learned relationally.

Mathematics now makes sense – it is not some mysterious world that only ‘smart people’
dare enter. At the other end of the continuum, instrumental understanding has the
potential to produce mathematics-related anxiety, and fear of/avoidance behaviour
towards, mathematics.

Relational understanding also promotes positive views about mathematics. By sensing

the connectedness and logic of mathematics, learners are more likely to be attracted to it
or to describe it in positive terms.

In concluding this section on relational understanding, a reminder that learning with

understanding is both essential and possible. That is, all learners can and must learn
mathematics with understanding, as that is the only way to ensure that they will be able
to cope with the many unknown problems that will confront them in the future.

3.6. Strategies for effective teaching

In concluding this lesson, we pose critical questions for the teacher who wants to teach
for understanding:

• How can you construct lessons to promote appropriate reflective thought on the
part of your learners?

• Purposeful mental engagement or reflective thought about the ideas we want

learners to develop, is the single-most important key to effective teaching. If
learners do not think actively about the important concepts of a lesson, learning
simply will not take place. How can we make that happen?

3.7. Conclusion
In this learning unit, a distinction was made between two approaches to the teaching of
mathematics – rote learning, versus reasoning and understanding. Similar distinctions
have been made by authors such as Garofalo and Mtetwa (1990), who distinguish
between two approaches which, they believe, teach two different kinds of mathematics,
namely

• one which is based on instrumental understanding – using rules without

understanding; and
• another, which is based on relational understanding – knowing what to do and
why.

Instrumental understanding is easier to achieve, and because less knowledge is involved,

it leads to correct answers rather quickly. There are, however, more powerful advantages
to relational understanding:

• It is more adaptable to new situations.

 • Once learned, it is easier to remember, because when learners know why formulas
and procedures work, they are better able to assess their applicability to new
situations, and to make alterations where necessary and/or where possible.

Also, when learners can see how various concepts and procedures relate to one another,
they tend to recall parts of a connected whole, rather than separate items. Relational
mathematics may be more satisfying than instrumental mathematics.

Teaching mathematics for understanding means involving learners in activities and tasks
that call on them to reason and communicate their reasoning, rather than to reproduce
memorised rules and procedures. The classroom atmosphere should be non-threatening
and supportive, and encourage the verbalisation and justification of thoughts, actions and
conclusions.

This learning unit focused on developing understanding in mathematics, by proposing

that this be done through the purposeful use and implementation of a widely accepted
theory known as constructivism.

According to this theory, learners must be active participants in the development of their
own understanding. They must construct their own knowledge, thus giving their own
meaning to things they perceive or think about. The tools learners use to build
understanding are their own existing ideas (i.e., knowledge they already possess). All
mathematical concepts and relationships are constructed internally and exist in the mind
as part of a network of ideas. These are not transmitted by the teacher. Existing ideas are
connected to a new, emerging idea if the learner gives meaning to it – s/he must be
mentally active in order to do this. Constructing knowledge requires reflective thought,
and actively thinking about, or mentally working on, an idea. Ideas are constructed or
made meaningful when a learner integrates them into his/her existing structures of
knowledge (or cognitive schemata). As learning occurs, networks are rearranged, added
to, or modified.

The general principles of constructivism are largely based on Piaget's principles of:

• assimilation (the use of existing schemata to give meaning to experiences); and

 • accommodation (altering existing ways of viewing ideas that contradict or do not
fit into existing schemata).

The constructivist classroom is a place where all learners can be involved in:
• sharing and socially interacting (cooperative learning);
• inventing and investigating new ideas;
• challenging;
• negotiating;
• solving problems;
• conjecturing;
• generalising; and
• testing.

Note that the focus of constructivism falls on the mentally active movement, from
instrumental learning along a continuum of connected ideas to relational understanding.
That is, from a situation of isolated and unconnected ideas, to a network of interrelated
ideas. The process requires reflective thought – active thinking and mentally working on
an idea.

1.8. Self-assessment
Tick the boxes to assess whether you have achieved the outcomes of this learning unit. If
you cannot tick all the boxes, work through the relevant part of the learning unit again.
# Checklist 
I am able to:
1 Critically reflect on the constructivist approach as an approach to learning mathematics. ❑

2 Cite – with understanding – examples of constructed learning, as opposed to rote ❑

learning.
3 Explain – with insight – ‘understanding’ in terms of the measure of the quality and ❑
quantity of connections.
4 Motivate – with insight – the benefits of relational understanding. ❑
5 Distinguish and explain the difference between the two types of knowledge in ❑
mathematics: conceptual and procedural.
6 Critically discuss the role of models in developing understanding in mathematics (using ❑
a few examples).
7 Motivate the three related uses of models in a developmental approach to teaching. ❑

8 Describe the foundations of a developmental approach based on a constructivist view ❑

of learning.
9 Evaluate the seven strategies for effective teaching, based on the perspectives of this ❑
learning unit.