Developing an understanding of fractions is critical as a significant predictor for the learning progression of advanced domains; however, students face significant challenges in learning fractions because of their unique properties. To systematically approach remediation, this study examined the common error patterns committed by middle-school students with and without learning disabilities in mathematics when solving fraction computations involving addition. Based on the logic that errors reflect meaningful misconceptions, errors associated in each solution stage established in a solution algorithm were analyzed. Findings provide instruction implications to develop practical guidelines for researchers, insights into a starting point of instruction when teaching students in diverse achievement levels, and an awareness about specific problematic areas requiring more intensive instruction and intervention. Careful consideration of errors associated within a solution pathway can maximize the efficacy of instructions. Future research directions, educational implications, and limitations are discussed.
BehrM. J.WachsmuthI.PostT. R.LeshR. (1984). Order and equivalence of rational numbers: A clinical teaching experiment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15, 323–341.
2.
BlöteA. W.Van der BurgE.KleinA. S. (2001). Students’ flexibility in solving two-digit addition and subtraction problems: Instruction effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 627–638.
3.
BottgeB. A.MaX.GassawayL.ButlerM.TolandM. D. (2014). Detecting and correcting fractions computation error patterns. Exceptional Children, 80, 237–255.
4.
BrownG.QuinnR. J. (2006). Algebra students’ difficulty with fractions: An error analysis. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 62(4), 28–40.
5.
CalhoonM. B.EmersonR. W.FloresM.HouchinsD. E. (2007). Computational fluency performance profile of high school students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 292–303.
EnrightB. E. (1990). Mathematics assessment tips: A checklist of common errors. Diagnostique, 16, 145–148.
9.
FleischnerJ. E.ManheimerM. A. (1997). Math interventions for students with learning disabilities: Myths and realities. School Psychology Review.
10.
FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.PaulsenK.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 493–513.
11.
GamstG.MeyersL. S.GuarinoA. J. (2008). Analysis of variance designs: A conceptual and computational approach with SPSS and SAS. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
12.
GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(1), 4–15.
13.
GearyD. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: a 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1539.
14.
GearyD. C.HoardM. K.Byrd-CravenJ.NugentL.NumteeC. (2007). Cognitive mechanisms underlying achievement deficits in children with mathematical learning disability. Child Development, 78, 1343–1359.
15.
GerstenR.KellyB. (1992). Coaching secondary special education teachers in implementation of an innovative videodisc mathematics curriculum. Remedial & Special Education, 13(4), 40–51
16.
HwangJ. (2016). An examination of error patterns associated with middle school students’ solution pathways when solving fraction computation involving addition (Dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, USA.
17.
HwangJ.RiccominiP. J. (2019). Investigating the relationship between solution pathway preference and accuracy of adding fractions for students with learning disabilities. British Journal of Special Education, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12250
18.
KingsdorfS.KrawecJ. (2014). Error analysis of mathematical word problem solving across students with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29, 66–74.
19.
KleinM.BirenbaumM.StandifordS.TatsuokaK. K. (1981). Constructing tests to diagnose student “bugs” with the addition and subtraction of fractions. Urbana: Computer-Based Education Research Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana.
20.
LunetaK.MakonyeP. J. (2010). Learner errors and misconceptions in elementary analysis: A case study of a grade 12 class in South Africa. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 3(3), 35–46.
21.
MazzoccoM. M. M.DevlinK. T. (2008). Parts and “holes”: Gaps in rational number sense in children with vs. without mathematical learning disability. Developmental Science, 11, 681–691.
22.
MazzoccoM. M. M.MyersG. F.LewisK. E.HanichL. B.MurphyM. M. (2013). Limited knowledge of fraction representations differentiates middle school students with mathematics learning disability (dyscalculia) versus low mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 115, 371–387.
23.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2003). The nation’s report card. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.nationsreportcard.gov
24.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2005). The nation’s report card. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.nationsreportcard.gov
25.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2007). The nation’s report card. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.nationsreportcard.gov
26.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2013). The nation’s report card. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.nationsreportcard.gov
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
29.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2008). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.nctm.org/curriculumfocalpoints/
30.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston, VA: Author.
31.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
32.
NewtonK. J.WillardC.TeufelC. (2014). An examination of the ways that students with learning disabilities solve fraction computation problems. Elementary School Journal, 115(1), 1–21.
33.
NiY.ZhouY. (2005). Teaching and learning fraction and rational numbers: The origins and implications of whole number bias. Educational Psychologist, 40, 27–52.
34.
PeckD. M.JencksS. M.ChatterleyL. J. (1980). How can you tell?The Elementary School Journal, 80, 178–184.
35.
RadatzH. (1980). Students’ errors in the mathematical learning process: A survey. For the Learning of Mathematics, 1, 16–20.
36.
RaghubarK.CirinoP.BarnesM.Ewing-CobbsL.FletcherJ.FuchsL. (2009). Errors in multi-digit arithmetic and behavioral inattention in children with math difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 356–371.
37.
RiccominiP. J.MoranoS.HughesC. A. (2017). Big ideas in special education: Specially designed instruction, high-leverage practices, explicit instruction, and intensive instruction. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 50(1), 20–27.
38.
SchumacherR. F.MaloneA. S. (2017). Error patterns with fraction calculations at fourth grade as a function of students’ mathematics achievement status. The Elementary School Journal, 118, 1105–1127.
39.
SieglerR. S.FazioL. K.BaileyD. H.ZhouX. (2013). Fractions: The new frontier for theories of numerical development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17, 13–19.
40.
SieglerR. S.PykeA. A. (2013). Developmental and individual differences in understanding of fractions. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1994–2004.
41.
SieglerR. S.ThompsonC. A.SchneiderM. (2011). An integrated theory of whole number and fractions development. Cognitive Psychology, 62, 273–296.
42.
SmithJ. P.IIIDisessaA. A.RoschelleJ. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163.
43.
StarJ. R.NewtonK. J. (2009). The nature and development of experts’ strategy flexibility for solving equations. Zdmmathematics Education, 41, 557–567.
44.
StarJ. R.SeifertC. (2006). The development of flexibility in equation solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31, 280–300.
45.
SteffeL. P.OliveJ. (1991). The problem of fractions in the elementary school. The Arithmetic Teacher, 38(9), 22–24.
46.
SwansonH. L.Beebe-FrankenbergerM. (2004). The relationship between working memory and mathematical problem solving in children at risk and not at risk for serious math difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 471–491.
47.
TatsuokaK. K.BirenbaumM.TatsuokaM. M.BaillieR. (1980). Psychometric approach to error analysis of response patterns of achievement tests (Technical Report 80-3-ONR). Urbana: Computer-Based Education Research Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana.
48.
TestD. W.EllisM. F. (2005). The effects of LAP fractions on addition and subtraction of fractions with students with mild disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 11–24.
49.
WilsonM.SwansonL. (2001). Are mathematics disabilities due to a domain-general or a domain-specific working memory deficit?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34, 237–248.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
