#
Concreteness fading fosters children's understanding of the inversion concept in addition and subtraction
ARTICLE

## Boby Ho-Hong Ching, Xiaohan Wu

Learning and Instruction Volume 61, Number 1, ISSN 0959-4752 Publisher: Elsevier Ltd

## Abstract

This study examined the effectiveness of various instructional strategies that aimed to enhance children's understanding of the inversion concept. One hundred and forty kindergartners were randomly assigned to each of the groups namely: (a) concrete-only, (b) abstract-only, (c) concreteness fading, (d) abstract-to-concrete, (e) control. They participated in a pre-test, two training sessions, an immediate post-test, and an 8-week delayed post-test. All the intervention groups showed significantly greater progress than the control group in solving the inversion problems in the post-tests. Concrete representations were more effective than abstract representations to promote knowledge transfer for children with lower prior knowledge. The superior benefits of concreteness fading appeared more prominent in the delayed post-test for children with lower prior knowledge. This study suggests that (1) concrete representations should not be avoided in teaching mathematics to children and (2) the order of presentation for various representations is a key for successful learning.

## Citation

Ching, B.H.H. & Wu, X. (2019). Concreteness fading fosters children's understanding of the inversion concept in addition and subtraction. Learning and Instruction, 61(1), 148-159. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved January 19, 2020 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/208159/.

This record was imported from Learning and Instruction on March 15, 2019. Learning and Instruction is a publication of Elsevier.

Full text is availabe on Science Direct: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.10.006### Keywords

## References

View References & Citations Map- Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, pp. 131-152.
- Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), pp. 183-198.
- Alfieri, L., Brooks, P.J., Aldrich, N.J., & Tenenbaum, H.R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning?. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), pp. 1-18.
- Barnett, S.M., & Ceci, S.J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128, pp. 612-637. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612.
- Baroody, A.J., & Lai, M. (2007). Preschoolers' understanding of the addition-subtraction inverse principle: A Taiwanese sample. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9, pp. 131-171.
- Baroody, A.J., Torbeyns, J., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Special issue on young children's understanding and application of subtraction-related principles: Introduction. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, pp. 2-9.
- Bassok, M., & Holyoak, K.J. (1989). Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(1), pp. 153-166.
- Belenky, D.M., & Schalk, L. (2014). The effects of idealized and grounded materials on learning, transfer, an interest: An organizing framework for categorizing external knowledge representations. Educational Psychology Review, 26, pp. 27-50. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9251-9.
- Billstein, R., Libeskind, S., & Lott, J.W. (2009). A problem solving approach to mathematics: For elementary school teachers. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.
- Bisanz, J., Watchorn, R.P.D., Piatt, C., & Sherman, J. (2009). On “understanding” children's developing use of inversion. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, pp. 10-24.
- Braithwaite, D.W., & Goldstone, R.L. (2013). Flexibility in data interpretation: Effects of representational format. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, pp. 1-16.
- Brown, M.C., McNeil, N.M., & Glenberg, A.M. (2009). Using concreteness in education: Real problems, potential solutions. Child Development Perspectives, 3(3), pp. 160-164. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00098.x.
- Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
- Bryant, P. (1995). Children and arithmetic. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 36, pp. 3-32.
- Bryant, P., Christie, C., & Rendu, A. (1999). Children's understanding of the relation between addition and subtraction: Inversion, identity and decomposition. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 74, pp. 194-212.
- Canobi, K.H. (2005). Children's profiles of addition and subtraction understanding. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, pp. 220-246.
- Canobi, K., Reeve, R., & Pattison, P.E. (2003). Patterns of knowledge in children’s addition. Developmental Psychology, 39, pp. 521-534.
- Carbonneau, K.J., Marley, S.C., & Selig, J.P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, pp. 380-400. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084.
- Ching, B.H.-H., & Nunes, T. (2017). The importance of additive reasoning in children's mathematical achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109, pp. 477-508.
- Ching, B.H.-H., & Nunes, T. (2017). Children's understanding of the commutativity and complement principles: A latent profile analysis. Learning and Instruction, 47, pp. 65-79.
- Copley, J.V. (2000). The young child and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
- Crooks, N.M., & Alibali, M.W. (2014). Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Developmental Review, 34, pp. 344-377. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2014.10.001.
- De Bock, D., Deprez, J., Van Dooren, W., Roelens, M., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Abstract or concrete examples in learning mathematics? A replication and elaboration of Kaminski, Sloutsky, and Heckler's study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(2), pp. 109-126.
- Fennema, E.H. (1972). The relative effectiveness of a symbolic and a concrete model in learning a selected mathematical principle. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3(4), pp. 233-238.
- Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
- Fyfe, E.R., McNeil, N.M., & Borjas, S. (2015). Benefits of “concreteness fading” for children's mathematics understanding. Learning and Instruction, 35, pp. 104-120. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.10.004.
- Fyfe, E.,R., McNeil, N.M., Son, J.Y., & Goldstone, R.L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26, pp. 9-15.
- Gilmore, C.K. (2006). Investigating children's understanding of inversion using the missing number paradigm. Cognitive Development, 21, pp. 201-316.
- Gilmore, C.K., & Bryant, P. (2006). Individual differences in children's understanding of inversion and arithmetical skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, pp. 309-331.
- Gilmore, C.K., & Papadatou-Pastou, M. (2009). Patterns of individual differences in conceptual understanding and arithmetical skills: A meta-analysis. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, pp. 25-40. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/1098600802583923.
- Glenberg, A.M., Brown, M., & Levin, J.R. (2007). Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups using a manipulation strategy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), pp. 389-399.
- Glenberg, A.M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J.R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M.P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children's reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, pp. 424-436. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.424.
- Goldstone, R.L., & Sakamoto, Y. (2003). The transfer of abstract principles governing complex adaptive systems. Cognitive Psychology, 46(4), pp. 414-466. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00519-4.
- Goldstone, R.L., & Son, J.Y. (2005). The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, pp. 69-110. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1401_4.
- Gomez, R.L., Bootzin, R.R., & Nadel, L. (2006). Naps promote abstraction in language-learning infants. Psychological Science, 17, pp. 670-674. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01764.x.
- Gürbüz, R. (2010). The effect of activity-based instruction on conceptual development of seventh grade students in probability. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 41(6), pp. 743-767.
- Hinzman, K.P. (1997). Use of manipulatives in mathematics at the middle school level and their effects on student grades and attitudes.
- Jones, M.G. (2009). Transfer, abstraction, and context. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, pp. 80-89.
- Kaminski, J.A., Sloutsky, V.M., & Heckler, A.F. (2008). The advantage of abstract examples in learning math. Science, 320, pp. 454-455. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1126/%20science.1154659.
- Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), pp. 75-86.
- Kotovsky, K., Hayes, J.R., & Simon, H.A. (1985). Why are some problem hard? Evidence from the tower of Hanoi. Cognitive Psychology, 17, p. 248e294. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(85)90009-X.
- Kuhfittig, P.K.F. (1974). The relative effectiveness of concrete aids in discovery learning. School Science & Mathematics, 74(2), pp. 104-108.
- Landy, D.H., & Goldstone, R.L. (2007). How space guides interpretation of a novel mathematical system. Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the cognitive science society, pp. 431-436. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
- LeBlanc, J.F. (1968). The performance of first grade children in four levels of conservation of numerousness and three IQ groups when solving arithmetic subtraction problems. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A. Humanities and Social Sciences, 29, p. 67A.
- Marley, S.C., Levin, J.R., & Glenberg, A.M. (2007). Improving Native American children's listening comprehension through concrete representations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), pp. 537-550.
- Marley, S.C., Szabo, Z., Levin, J.R., & Glenberg, A.M. (2011). Investigation of an activity-based text-processing strategy in mixed-age child dyads. The Journal of Experimental Education, 79(3), pp. 340-360.
- Martin, T. (2009). A theory of physically distributed learning: How external environments and internal states interact in mathematics learning. Child Development Perspectives, 3, pp. 140-144.
- Martin, T., & Schwartz, D.L. (2005). Physically distributed learning: Adapting and reinterpreting physical environments in the development of fraction concepts. Cognitive Science, 29, pp. 587-625. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_15.
- Mayer, R.E. (2002). Multimedia learning. The psychology of learning and motivation, Vol. 41, pp. 85-139. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Mayer, R.E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?. American Psychologist, 59(1), pp. 14-19.
- Mayer, R.E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11(4), pp. 256-265.
- McNeil, N.M., & Fyfe, E.R. (2012). “Concreteness fading” promotes transfer of mathematical knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 22, pp. 440-448.
- McNeil, N., Uttal, D., Jarvin, L., & Sternberg, R. (2009). Should you show me the money? Concrete objects both hurt and help performance on mathematics problems. Learning and Instruction, 19, pp. 171-184. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/%20j.learninstruc.2008.03.005.
- Montessori, M. (1917). The advanced Montessori method. New York, NY: Frederick A. Stokes.
- Nathan, M.J. (2012). Rethinking formalisms in formal education. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), pp. 125-148.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Standards & focal points. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/standards/default.aspx?id=58.
- Nunes, T., & Bryant, P.E. (1996). Children doing mathematics. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Nunes, T., & Bryant, P.E. (2015). The development of mathematical reasoning. Handbook of child psychology and developmental science, pp. 715-762. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Barros, R., & Sylva, K. (2012). The relative importance of two different mathematical abilities to mathematical achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, pp. 136-156. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02033.x.
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Evans, D., Bell, D., & Barros, R. (2012). Teaching children how to include the inversion principle in their reasoning about quantitative relations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, pp. 371-388.
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Evans, D., Bell, D., Gardner, S., & Gardner, A. (2007). The contribution of logical reasoning to the learning of mathematics in primary school. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 25, pp. 147-166. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1348/026151006X153127.
- Nunes, T., Bryant, P., Hallett, D., Bell, D., & Evans, D. (2009). Teaching children about the inverse relation between addition and subtraction. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, pp. 61-78.
- Nunes, T., Schliemann, A.D., & Carraher, D.W. (1993). Street mathematics and school mathematics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Ottmar, E., & Landy, D. (2017). Concreteness fading of algebraic instruction: Effects on learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 26, pp. 51-78.
- Piaget, J. (1952). The child's conception of number. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
- Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York, NY: Orion Press.
- Rasmussen, C., Ho, E., & Bisanz, J. (2003). Use of the mathematical principle of inversion in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 85, pp. 89-102.
- van Reeuwijk, M. (2001). From informal to formal, progressive formalization: An example on “solving systems of equations”. The future of the teaching and learning of algebra: Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference, Vol., pp. 613-620. Available online: http://repository.unimelb.edu.au/10187/2812.
- Resnick, L.B. (1992). From protoquantities to operators: Building mathematical competence on a foundation of everyday knowledge. Analysis of arithmetic for mathematics teaching, Vol. 19, pp. 275-323. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Resnick, L.B., & Omanson, S.F. (1987). Learning to understand arithmetic. Advances in instructional psychology, Vol., pp. 41-95. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Robertson, E.M., Pascual-Leone, A., & Miall, R.C. (2004). Current concepts in procedural consolidation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, pp. 1-7. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1426.
- Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., & Catrambone, R. (2006). Making the abstract concrete: Visualizing mathematical solution procedures. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(1), pp. 9-25.
- Schliemann, A.D., & Carraher, D.W. (2002). The evolution of mathematical reasoning: Everyday versus idealized understandings. Developmental Review, 22, pp. 242-266. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.2002.0547.
- Schneider, M. (2012). Commentary 2: Knowledge integration in mathematics learning: The case of inversion. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, pp. 447-453. Available online: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41413124.
- Schneider, M., & Stern, E. (2009). The inverse relation of addition and subtraction: A knowledge integration perspective. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 77, pp. 92-101.
- Schnotz, W. (2005). An integrated model of text and picture comprehension. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning, pp. 49-60. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Schwartz, D.L., Chase, C.C., & Bransford, J.D. (2012). Resisting overzealous transfer: Coordinating previously successful routines with needs for new learning. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), pp. 204-214.
- Schwartz, D.L., Chase, C.C., Oppezzo, M.A., & Chin, D.B. (2011). Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: The effects of telling first on learning and transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(4), pp. 759-775.
- Sherman, J., & Bisanz, J. (2007). Evidence for use of mathematical inversion by three-year-old children. Journal of Cognition and Development, 8, pp. 333-344.
- Silers, S.A., & Willows, K.J. (2014). Individual differences in the effect of relevant concreteness on learning and transfer of a mathematical concept. Learning and Instruction, 33, pp. 170-181. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.05.001.
- Sloutsky, V.M., Kaminski, J.A., & Heckler, A.F. (2005). The advantage of simple symbols for learning and transfer. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(3), pp. 508-513.
- Son, J.Y., & Goldstone, R.L. (2009). Fostering general transfer with specific simulations. Pragmatics and Cognition, 17(1), pp. 1-42.
- Sowell, E.J. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), pp. 498-505.
- Stern, E. (2005). Transitions in mathematics: From intuitive quantification to symbol-based reasoning. Paper presented at the international society for the study of behavioural development (ISSBD), July, Melbourne, Australia.
- Stickgold, R., & Walker, M. (2004). To sleep, perchance to gain creative insight?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, pp. 191-192. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.03.003.
- Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
- Tapola, A., Veermans, M., & Niemivirta, M. (2013). Predictors and outcomes of situational interest during a science learning task. Instructional Science, 41, pp. 1047-1064.
- Torbeyns, J., Peters, G., de Smedt, B., Ghesquière, P., & Vershaffel, L. (2016). Children's understanding of the addition/subtraction complement principle. British Journal of Educational Psychology.
- Torbeyns, J., Smedt, B.D., Stassens, N., Ghesquière, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Solving subtraction problems by means of indirect addition. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, pp. 79-91.
- Verschaffel, L., Bryant, P., & Torbeyns, J. (2012). Mathematical inversion: Introduction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, pp. 327-334.
- Vilette, B. (2002). Do young children grasp the inverse relationship between addition and subtraction? Evidence against early arithmetic. Cognitive Development, 17, pp. 1365-1383.
- Wagner, U., Gals, S., Halder, H., Verleger, R., & Born, J. (2004). Sleep inspires insight. Nature, 427, pp. 352-355. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02223.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References