Experimental students significantly outperformed control students at posttest in expressing a functional relationship in words (grades 3-4) and in symbols (all grades), with no students writing correct symbolic rules at pretest¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? No students wrote a correct symbolic functional rule at pretest, but experimental students improved substantially, with over 30% of fourth graders and almost half of fifth graders producing correct symbolic rules at posttest. → Stephens 2011 q3 i? Experimental students outperformed control students at posttest (p < 0.01) on expressing the relationship in words and symbols (Table 3). → Stephens 2011 (2)

Evidence¶

Stephens 2011¶

Stephens, A. C., Isler, I., Marum, T., Blanton, M. L., Knuth, E. J., & Gardiner, A. M. (2011). From recursive pattern to correspondence rule: Developing students' abilities to engage in functional thinking. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED585054

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Pre-post analysis of Brady task parts c and d (Table 3): experimental symbolic-rule proportions rose from .000 to .158 (grade 3), .295 (grade 4), and .455 (grade 5), with "almost half of fifth graders prodXcing correct symbolic rXles at posttest."

"1o stXdents Zrote a correct symbolic fXnctional rXle in response to part d at pretest. ([perimental stXdents improved in this area TXite a bit over the coXrse of the intervention, Zith over 30 of foXrth graders and almost half of fifth graders prodXcing correct symbolic rXles at posttest."

Stephens 2011 (2)¶

Stephens, A. C., Isler, I., Marum, T., Blanton, M. L., Knuth, E. J., & Gardiner, A. M. (2011). From recursive pattern to correspondence rule: Developing students' abilities to engage in functional thinking. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED585054

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Table 3 footnote reports the experimental group outperformed the control group at posttest on correct covariational/functional descriptions in words (part c) and functional rules in symbols (part d), at p < 0.01.

"([perimental groXp oXtperformed contro l groXp at posttest p 0.01."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Algebraic Thinking — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• On a 'far' prediction to 10 tables, both conditions improved with no significant posttest differences in correctness, but the experimental group increasingly used a function rule as its strategy — related
• Grades 3-4 students in an EALP-based early algebra intervention made significant improvements in constructing function tables and outperformed control students at posttest — related
• After the intervention, posttest differences in identifying patterns in a function table were only marginally significant at grade 3, but experimental fifth graders more often described covariational relationships than recursive patterns — related