Login

1999 Conference Proceedings

Home
>
Publications
>
Annual Conference Proceedings
>
1999 Conference Proceedings

1999 Conference Proceedings

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Making Sense of Primary Mathematics – Gillian M. Boulton-Lewis

Research in Mathematics Education in Australia: What it was – What it is – What it might be – J.P. Keeves

Seeking a Rationale for Particular Classroom Tasks and Activity – Peter Sullivan

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AWARD

Successful Percent Problem Solving for Year 8 Students Using the Proportional Number Line Method – Shelley Dole

RESEARCH PAPERS

Differences Between the Sexes in Mathematics Achievement in Australia – Tilahun Mengesha Afrassa & John P. Keeves

Cumulative and Exploratory Talk in a Collaborative Learning Classroom – Mary Barnes

A Case Study of Teacher Endorsement of an Integrated Learning System – Annette R. Baturo, Tom J. Cooper, Campbell J. McRobbie & Gillian C. Kidman

Enactivism and Mathematics Education – Andy Begg

The Writing of Explanations and Justifications in Mathematics: Differences and Dilemmas – Brenda Bicknell

The Mathematical Achievement of Children in the Count Me In Too Program – Janette Bobis & Peter Gould

Mathematics, ICT and Effective Teaching – Rod Bramald & Steve Higgins

Mathematics Teachers and the VCE: Broadening the Educational Landscape – Christine Brew, Gilah Leder & Glenn Rowley

An Exploration of Gender Differences in Subject Choice and Beliefs Among Year 12 Students – Peter C Brinkworth

Speaking With Authority in Episodes of Mathematical Discourse – Raymond A J Brown & Peter Renshaw

Do Games Help the Learning of Probability? – Tim Burgess

Invented Algorithms: Teachers Face the Challenge – Anne Buzeika

Developing Performance Assessment Tasks in Mathematics: A Case Study – Rosemary A. Callingham

Children’s Informal Composite and Truncated Partitioning Strategies – Kathy Charles & Rod Nason

Jumping to Conclusions: Data Interpretation by Young Adults – Helen L. Chick

The Use of Concept Mapping Procedure to Characterise Teachers’ Mathematical Content Knowledge – Mohan Chinnappan, Michael Lawson & Rod Nason

Conceptual Modelling of Functions by an Experienced Teacher – Mohan Chinnappan & Mike Thomas

Equals, Expressions, Equations, and the Meaning of Variable: A Teaching Experiment – Tom T. Cooper, Annette R. Baturo & Anne M. Williams

Assessing Diagram Quality: Making a Difference to Representation – Carmel M Diezmann

Enhanced Mathematics Learning: Does Technology Make a Difference? – Katherine Dix

Of Course I Can(‘t) do Mathematics: Ethnicity and the Stereotyping of Mathematics – Helen J Forgasz, Gilah C Leder & Tasos Barkatsas

Student Participation: Phenomenon and Analysis – Patricia A. Forster

A Tale of Two Cities: When Mathematics, Computers, and Students Meet – Peter Galbraith, Chris Haines & Mike Pemberton

Technology, Mathematics, and People: Interactions in a Community of Practice – Peter Galbraith, Peter Renshaw, Merrilyn Goos & Vince Geiger

Teachers Exploring Numeracy Learning & Teaching in the Early Years of Schooling – Ann Gervasoni

Understanding Mathematical Text Through Peer Explanations – Merrilyn Goos

Emerging Themes in Statistics Education – Sharon Gunn

Mental Addition and Subtraction Strategies: Two Case Studies – Ann Heirdsfield

The Development of a Framework of Growth Points to Monitor Students’ Comprehension of Algebra in Grades 7-9 – Marj Horne

Influences on Secondary Mathematics Curriculum in Victoria – John Horwood

Deaf Students Solving of Arithmetic Word Problems – Merv Hyde, Des Power & Robyn Zevenbergen

Mathematical Knowledge in a Mathematics Teaching Episode – Clive Kanes

Learning Styles in Secondary Mathematics Classrooms – Stephen Keast

Grade 4, 6 and 8 Students’ Strategies in Area Measurement – Gillian C. Kidman

Agency/Numeracy: A Poststructuralist Analysis of the Relationship Between Classroom Mathematics and Numeracy in New Times – Mary Klein

Assessment Of Students’ Understanding in Geometry: The Difficulties in Writing Good Questions – Christine Lawrie & John Pegg

Extended Common Assessment Tasks in VCE Mathematics: Validity, Reliability and Other Issues – David Leigh-Lancaster & Ken Rowe

Free Problem-Posing: Year 3/4 Students Constructing Problems for Friends to Solve – Tom Lowrie

Children’s Generated Word Problems: A Case Study – K. J. Maguire

The Learning Networks of Isolated Teachers: The Use of Audiographics Communication Technology to Build a Virtual Mathematics Department – H Elaine Mayo & Kevin Hannah

An Analysis of the Teacher’s Proactive Role in Supporting the Development of Symbolizations – Kay McClain & Paul Cobb

Learning Calculus with Supercalculators – Barry McCrae, Gary Asp & Margaret Kendal

Teacher Mediation of Student Constructions of Algebra Knowledge – Brenda Menzel & David Clarke

How to Teach Generalisations in Mathematics? – Michael Mitchelmore

The Conjunction Fallacy and Longitudinal Development of Chance Expression – Jonathan B. Moritz & Jane M. Watson

Perceptions of Mathematical Understanding – Judith A. Mousley

Graphics Calculators in the Public Examination of Calculus: Misuses and Misconceptions – Ute Mueller & Patricia A. Forster

Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Responses to Computers and Their Beliefs About the Role of Computers in Their Teaching – Stephen Norton

Visual Representations in First Year Statistics – Lynne Outhred & Pamela F. Shaw

An Analysis of Year 12 Students’ Performances on Basic Algebra Questions – John Pegg & Robyn Hadfield

Some Language Issues in the Assessment of Secondary Mathematics – Bob Perry, Peter Howard, & Brian Miller

Computer Algebra Systems Facilitate Positive Learning Strategies – Robyn Pierce

The Conflict Between Teachers’ Beliefs and Classroom Practices – Mal Shield

Understanding Decimals: The Path to Expertise – Kaye Stacey & Vicki Steinle

Accessibility of Applications Tasks – Gloria Stillman

Choices of Computational Strategies – Paul Swan & Jack Bana

Reducing the Incidence of Mathematical Misconceptions in ‘Middle Band’ Students – Philip Swedosh

Children’s Understanding of the Number System – Noel Thomas & Joanne Mulligan

The Cross-Cultural Perspective of Teachers’ Beliefs and their Influence on Teaching Practices: A Case Study of Two Teachers Teaching Secondary Mathematics in Australia and Indonesia – Theresia Tirta Gondoseputro

Graphics Calculators in Victorian Secondary Schools: Teacher Perceptions of Use – Patrick Tobin, Alia Routitsky & Peter Jones

Cabri Geometry: A Catalyst for Growth in Geometric Understanding – Jill Vincent & Barry McCrae

The Relationship Between the Purported Use of Assessment Techniques and Beliefs about the Uses of Assessment – Elizabeth Warren & Steven Nisbet

Longitudinal Understanding of Conditional Probability by School Students – Jane M. Watson &. Jonathan B. Moritz

Mathematics: More Time, More Ticks! – Martin Watts, Leo Crameri & Suzanne Millar

Teacher Action Theories and the Use of Group Work in Upper Primary Mathematics Classrooms – Allan White

Exploring Diversity: Year 2 Students’ Responses to Questions Concerning Simple 2D Shapes – Jacquelyn Whitland & John Pegg

Novice Students’ Conceptual Knowledge of Statistical Hypothesis Testing – Anne M. Williams

Research Papers

The following four documents are essential to read and complete when considering to submit a research paper to the MERGA conference.

Research paper guidelines
Research paper template (to be used to write the paper which is then submitted to the MERGA conference website)
Author checklist
Publication Agreement (to be submitting on the MERGA conference website)

Research papers can take two major forms:

i. reports of empirical investigations; or

ii. reports that are not based on empirical research including:

– a theoretical discussion;

– a position paper;

– a report of scholarly enquiry in progress;

– a literature review, a meta-study;

– an account of a new initiative;

– a reflective critique of practice; or

– any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms.

All papers for publication in the conference proceedings should contain the following:

– a statement of the problem/issue and a discussion of its significance;
– a critical analysis of the research literature as it relates to the topic of the paper; and
– conclusions and implications for mathematics education derived from the study.

All papers must respect MERGA’s ethical guidelines relating to research work. Papers should be not more than the set length. (Formatting details and WORD template are available from the submissions). In addition, papers must be: readable; free of grammatical, spelling and typographical errors; and adhere strictly to style requirements advertised by the conference proceedings Editorial Team.

i. Empirical investigations

When empirical investigations are reported (such as in an experimental intervention, confirmatory study, or action research, etc.), the paper should also include

– a statement of rationale for methodologies used in collecting and analysing data;
– a critical discussion of data findings in the light of the research literature; and
– in the literature review, prior work in the area should be acknowledged and an explanation of how the work reported in the paper builds on that earlier work should be included.

ii. Theoretical or position papers

When the work is a theoretical discussion, a position paper, a report of scholarly inquiry in progress, a review of literature, a theoretical study, a meta-study, an account of a new initiative, a reflective critique of practice or any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms, the material presented must be discussed critically, and alternative points of view relating to themes presented should be appropriately argued.
It is expected that presenting authors will have 40 minutes to present their work at the conference. At least 10 minutes must be allowed to field questions and comments from the audience.

Originality

Only research papers that are substantially different from work that has been published previously will be considered for publication in the conference proceedings and/or presentation at the conference.

Reviewing of research papers

Research papers will be blind reviewed by a panel of peers approved by the conference committee. The main purpose of the refereeing process is to contribute to the growth and development of quality practice in mathematics education research. Thus reviewers are asked to assist authors by providing helpful feedback and to comment on the suitability of papers for presentation at the conference. Accordingly, it will not be assumed that published papers presented at the conference will be as polished as articles in scholarly journals. Referees will be asked to assess papers being reviewed against the accepted norms for scholarly works presented at MERGA conferences, as set out above.

Each conference proceedings’ Editorial Team will exercise discretion over the reviewing process.

Reviewers’ comments will be returned to the authors. Authors whose papers are not accepted for publication may be invited by the editorial panel to present their paper at the conference, with an abstract (only) being published in the proceedings. Papers may be rejected outright, with no opportunity for presentation at the conference in an alternative form.

The MERGA website has detailed advice about criteria for reviewing of MERGA papers, review forms, and examples of strong and poor reviews of different types.

Presentation of research papers

Research papers are presented by author(s) only. A maximum of 30 minutes may be used for presenting the paper, and at least 10 minutes is then used for audience questions and open discussion.

Research Symposia

There are four essential documents to read and complete when considering to submit a research paper to the MERGA conference.

Symposia paper guidelines
Symposia paper template (to be used to write the paper which is then submitted to the MERGA conference website)
Author checklist
Publication Agreement (to be submitting on the MERGA conference website)

Presentation of groups of published papers related by theme in the form a research symposium is encouraged. The symposium forum will be particularly suitable for presentations relating to a single large project or presentations that explore topical themes from different and/or related perspectives. Special Interest Groups [SIGs] are encouraged to consider the symposium option as a means for sharing and discussing current research.

A symposium should consist of no more than four presentations of about 15 minutes duration each. The written papers should be half the length of research papers as described for research papers. Both research report types – empirical or non-empirical – are acceptable as published symposium papers.

A brief overview of the symposium (limit one page), including a title, the names of presenters, an introduction to the theme/project, and a short introduction to each of the 3-4 contributions, must be submitted with the set of short papers.

The symposium proposer will also nominate a person to chair the symposium, and a discussant can also be named if desired. This information should accompany the collection of papers submitted for review.

The set of symposium papers (and the overview) will be blind reviewed by a review panel. The main purpose of the reviews is the same as for published papers, and the same criteria are used. The reviewers will be asked to consider the cohesiveness of the set of symposium papers. They will indicate whether the symposium as a whole, and each paper within it, should be “accepted”, “rejected” or if it “requires revision”. If it is deemed that one, some or all of the papers are in need of revision, the reviewers will outline which papers need to be revised and provide suggestions for the required changes. When the revisions are made, the symposium papers will be re-submitted and the set of papers will be sent to the same review panel for further consideration. As with research papers, the final decision about which symposium papers will be published is at the discretion of the Editorial Team.

The date for submission of the collection of symposium papers is the same as for Early Bird papers. This date has been set for the benefit of the group of authors of symposia papers. Should the symposium papers require revision, the authors will have the time to make the corrections and resubmit the set of symposium papers to be re-reviewed by the original reviewers.

Presentation of symposia

Symposia are presented by author(s) only. At least 10 minutes must be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.