This study examined students’ understanding of diagrams and their use of diagrams as tools to solve mathematical word problems. Students with learning disabilities (LD), typically achieving students, and gifted students in Grades 4 through 7 (N = 95) participated. Students were presented with novel mathematical word problem-solving tasks and interviewed for their understanding of diagrams for solving problems. Scoring rubrics were designed to assess for levels of problem-solving performance, evidence of diagram use, type of diagram generated, how the diagram was used to solve problems, their definition of a diagram, and their reason for why a diagram can be used to solve problems. Results indicated that students with LD typically generated diagrams of a poorer nature and used them in a less strategic manner than their peers. Concerns regarding the impact of content knowledge on the quality of diagram generation as well as implications regarding instruction to use diagrams to understand and solve problems are discussed.
BrownD. L.PresmegN. C. (1993). Types of imagery used by elementary and secondary school students in mathematical reasoning. Proceedings of the 17th annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 137–144). Tsukuba, Japan.
2.
ConnollyA. J. (2007). KeyMath-3 diagnostic assessment. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.
3.
DiezmannC. M. (2000). Making sense with diagrams: Students’ difficulties with feature-similar problems. Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 228–234). Freemantle, Australia: MERGA.
4.
DiezmannC. M.EnglishL. D. (2001). Promoting the use of diagrams as tools for thinking. In CuocoA. A.CurcioF. R. (Eds.), The roles of representation in school mathematics: 2001 yearbook (pp. 77–89). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
5.
diSessaA. A.HammerD.SherinB. L.KolpakowskiT. (1991). Inventing graphing: Metarepresentational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117–160. doi:10.1016/S0732-3123(01)00051-7
6.
diSessaA. A.SherinB. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 385–398.
7.
Dufour-JanvierB.BednarzN.BelangerM. (1987). Pedagogical considerations concerning the problem of representation. In JanvierC. (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 109–122). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
GerstenR.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarshL.StarJ. R.WitzelD. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention for elementary and middle schools (NCEE2009-4060). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides
9.
GoldinG. A. (2003). Representation in school mathematics: A unifying research perspective. In KilpartrickJ.MartinW. G.SchifterD. (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 275–285). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
10.
GoughJ. (2007). Teaching square roots: Conceptual complexity in mathematics language. Australian Senior Mathematics Journal, 21(1), 53–57.
11.
GreenesC. E.ImmerzeelG.OckengaE.SchulmanL.SpunginR. (1980). Techniques of problem solving: Problem Deck AA. Palo Alto, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.
12.
HegartyM.KozhevnikovM. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 684–689. doi:0022-0663/ 99/S3.00
13.
JonesE. D.WilsonR.BhojwaniS. (1998). Mathematics instruction for secondary students with learning disabilities. In Pedrotty RiveraD. (Ed.), Mathematics education for students with learning disabilities: Theory to practice (pp. 155–176). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
14.
KaputJ. J. (1987). Representation systems and mathematics. In JanvierC. (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 19–26.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
LarkinJ. H.SimonH. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(87)80026-5
16.
LehrerR.SchaubleL. (2000). Inventing data structures for representational purposes: Elementary grade students’ classification models. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2, 49–72. doi:10.1207/S15327833MTL0202_3
17.
LeshR.ZawojewskiJ. (2007). Problem solving and modeling. In LesterF. K.Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 763–804). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
18.
MayerR. E.HegartyM. (1996). The process of understanding mathematical problems. In SternbergR. J.Ben-ZeevT. (Eds.), The nature of mathematical thinking (pp. 29–53). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
MontagueM. (1997). Cognitive strategy instruction in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 164–177. doi:10.1177/002221949703000204
20.
MontagueM. (2007). Self-regulation and mathematics instruction. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 75–83. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00232.x
21.
MontagueM.ApplegateB. (1993a). Mathematical problem-solving characteristics of middle school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 27, 175–201. doi:10.1177/002246699302700203
22.
MontagueM.ApplegateB. (1993b). Middle school students’ mathematical problem solving: An analysis of think-aloud protocols. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16, 19–32. doi:10.2307/1511157
23.
MontagueM.BosC.DoucetteM. (1991). Affective, cognitive, and metacognitive attributes of eight-grade mathematical problem solvers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 6, 145–151.
24.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
25.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. In KilpatrickJ.SwaffordJ.FindellB. (Eds.), Mathematics learning study committee, center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26.
NovickL. R.HurleyS. M.FrancisM. (1999). Evidence for abstract, schematic knowledge of three spatial diagram representations. Memory & Cognition, 27, 288–308. doi:10.3758/BF03211413
27.
OwensK. D.ClementsM. A. K. (1998). Representations in spatial problem solving in the classroom. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17, 197–218.
28.
PapeS. J.TchoshanovM. A. (2001). The role of representation(s) in developing mathematical understanding. Theory Into Practice, 40, 118–127. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4002_6
29.
PimmD. (1995). Symbols and meanings in school mathematics. New York, NY: Routledge.
30.
PresmegN. C. (1986). Visualization in high school mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6, 42–46. doi:10.1007/BF00305075
31.
ShafrirU. (1999). Representational competence. In SiegelI. E. (Ed.), Development of mental representation: Theories and applications (pp. 371–389). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32.
ShigematsuK.SowderL. (1994). Drawings for story problems: Practices in Japan and the United States. Arithmetic Teachers, 41, 544–547.
33.
SmithS. P. (2003). Representation in school mathematics: Children’s representations of problems. In KilpatrickJ.MartinW. G.SchifterD. (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 263–274). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
34.
SwansonH. L.JermanO. (2006). Math disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 76, 249–274. doi:10.3102/00346543076002249
35.
van GarderenD. (2007). Teaching students with LD to use diagrams to solve mathematical word problems. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 540–553. doi:10.1177/00222194070400060501
36.
van GarderenD.MontagueM. (2003). Visual-spatial representation, mathematical problem solving, and students of varying abilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 246–254. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00079
37.
WechslerD. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
38.
ZawojewskiJ. S.LeshR. (2003). A models and modeling perspective on problem solving. In LeshR.DoerrH. M. (Eds.), Beyond constructivism, models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving (pp. 317–328). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
