MERGA

2002 Conference Proceedings

2002 Conference Proceedings

2002 Full Conference Proceedings

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

A Samoan Perspective on Pacific Mathematics Education – Karoline Afamasaga-Fuata’i

Making a Difference: The Early Numeracy Project – Gill Thomas, AndrewTagg & Jenny Ward

Seeking Interventions to Improve Adult Numeracy Instruction in the United States: Hybrids Only Need Apply – Mary Jane Schmitt

The Process of Introducing New Tasks Using Dynamic Geometry into the Teaching of Mathematics – Colette Laborde

What Does it Mean to Teach Mathematics Differently? – Terry Wood


PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AWARD

Supporting Beginning Primary Mathematics Teachers through a ‘Fellow Worker’ Professional Development Model – Len Sparrow & Sandra Frid


RESEARCH PAPERS

The Mathematics Enhancement Project: The Pilot Phase – Wilfredo Alangui, Jerry Lane, Jessie Autagavaia, Bill Barton, Judy Paterson, Albert Poleki, Barbara Kensington-Miller, Arnold Van Den Reuvel

Swaps and Switches: Students’ Understandings of Commutativity – Glenda Anthony & Margaret Walshaw

Some Problematics in International Collaboration in Mathematics Education – Bill Atweh & Phil Clarkson

Effectiveness and Efficiency of Calculator Use for Computation in Years 8-10 – Jack Bana & Rachel Shipley

Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Beliefs About Teaching and Learning: Some Significant Factors – A. N. Barkatsas & J. A. Malone

Rethinking Curriculum: A Developer’s Perspective – Andy Begg

Development of Understanding of Place Value – Jeanette Bennan

Teacher Beliefs: Probing the Complexities – Kim Beswick

Curriculum and the Reality of Primary Teachers – Fred Biddulph, Merilyn Taylor, Ngarewa Hawera & Judy Bailey

Mental Computation Competence Across Years 3 to 10 – Rosemary Callingham & Alistair McIntosh

Exploring Mental Computation in the Middle Years – Annaliese Caney

Secondary Teachers’ Attitudes toward Probability and their Teaching Strategies – Lynn Carlson & Helen Doerr

Evaluating Pre-service Teachers’ Understanding of Middle School Mathematics – Helen Chick

A Problem-Based Schema Analysis in Algebra – Mohan Chinnappan

Year 3 Children’s Understanding of Fractions: Are we Making Progress? – Mohan Chinnappan & Michael Lawson

Drill, Examinations and the Learning of Mathematics – Ken Clements

Teacher Perspectives on Derivative – Alan Gil delos Santos & Michael Thomas

Summing up the Education of Mathematically Gifted Students – Carmel Diezmann & James Watters

Summative and Formative Assessment: Creating a Tool for Improving Learning – Brian Doig & John Lindsey

Maths Anxiety Self-assessment as a Quality Assurance Measure – Shelley Dole & Kim Beswick

Using CSCL Methods in Secondary Mathematics – Sabita M. D’Souza & Leigh N. Wood

Assessing the Potential Suitability of “Show That” Questions in CAS-Permitted Examinations – Peter Flynn & Gary Asp

Computers For Learning Mathematics: Equity Considerations – Helen J. Forgasz

An Investigation of Disjuncture between Graphing in School Mathematics and School Physics – Patricia A. Forster

The Sherpa-Student Role with a Graphics Calculator: Empowering or Disempowering? – Pat Forster, Peter Taylor & Craig Davis

Convergence or Divergence? Students, Maple, and Mathematics Learning – Peter Galbraith & Mike Pemberton

Matching the Hatch – Students’ Choices and Preferences in Relation to Handheld Technologies and Learning Mathematics – Vince Geiger, Merrilyn Goos, Peter Galbraith & Peter Renshaw

Intervention in Mathematics: Is Assistance More Effective in Grade 1 or Grade 2? – Ann Gervasoni

Beginning Teachers and Technology: Developing Identities as Teachers – Merrilyn Goos

Affective Development in Mathematics: A Case Study of Two Preservice Primary School Teachers – Peter Grootenboer

One Student’s Understanding of the Concept of Function – Channarong Heingraj & Mal Shield

Inaccurate Mental Addition and Subtraction: Causes and Compensation – Ann M. Heirdsfield

Single or Combination Grades in Mathematics in the Early Years – Marj Horne

A Model for Teaching Numeracy Strategies – Peter Hughes

Visualising and the Move from Informal to Formal Linear Measurement – Kathryn C. Irwin & Fiona Ell

Variation in a Chance Sampling Setting: The Lollies Task – Ben A. Kelly & Jane M. Watson

Textbooks: An Investigation of their Visual Attractiveness – Gillian Kidman

Pedagogical Content Knowledge Development of Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers – Jamie King & Joanna Masingila

Teacher Development for Inquiry Based Instructional Practice in Mathematics: A Poststructuralist Postscript – Mary Klein

A Poststructuralist Perspective on the Productive Power of Process in Mathematics. Education: Practical Implications for Pedagogy and Research – Mary Klein

Patterns of Misperceptions in Linear Transformations: Four Illustrations – Martin Lamb & Sam Leong & John Malone

Differential Pathways of Leaming: How Four Low-Achieving Undergraduate Students used a Graphics Calculator – Martin Lindsay

Characterising Secondary School Mathematics Lessons Using Teachers’ Pedagogical Concept Maps – Sanka Liyanage & Michael Thomas

Interpreting and Constructing Models in Computer Environments: Lego Blocks and Spatial Reasoning – Tom Lowrie

Making Connections Between Simulated and “Real” Worlds: Young Children Interpreting Computer Representations – Tom Lowrie

Use of Graphics Calculators in School Tests and Examinations – John Malone, Pat Forster, David Haimes, Ute Mueller

Measurement and its Relationship to Mathematics: Complexity within Young Children’s Beliefs – Andrea McDonough

Common Errors in Mental Computation of Students in Grades 3 – 10 – Alistair McIntosh

Horse Power or Empowerment? Mathematics Curriculum for Maori – Trojan Horse Revisited – Colleen McMurchy-Pilkington (Ngati Pikiao) & Tony Trinick

Aspects of Written Performance in Mathematics Learning – Tamsin Meaney

A Comparison of Novice and Expert Views of the Features of Quality Mathematics Teaching – Judith Mousley & Georgina Herbert

The Role of Structure in Children’s Development of Multiplicative Reasoning – Joanne Mulligan

Fostering Authentic, Sustained and Progressive Mathematical Knowledge-Building Activity in CSCL Communities – Rod Nason, Earl Woodruff & Richard Lesh

Rethinking Curriculum: An Ethical Perspective – Jim Neyland

Year Seven Students’ Representation of Numerical Data: The Influence of Sample Size – Steven Nisbet

The Role of Models and Representations in the Development of Multiplicative Thinking – Helen Norbury

The Transition from Concrete to Abstract Decimal Fractions: Taking Stock at the Beginning of 6th Grade in German Schools – Friedhelm Padberg

A Systemic Program for Students Who Are Experiencing Difficulty with Mathematics as They Transition from Elementary to High School in Australia – Bob Perry & Peter Howard

Beliefs of Primary Teachers about Mathematics and its Teaching and Learning: Views from Singapore, Philippines, Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Australia – Bob Perry, Catherine Vistro-Yu, Peter Howard, Ngai-Ying Wong Fong Ho Keong

Real-world Problem Solving in Small Groups: Interaction Patterns of Third and Fourth Graders – Andrea Peter-Koop

Statistical Thinking and Transnumeration – Maxine Pfannkuch, Amanda Rubick, Caroline Yoon

Monitoring Effective Use of Computer Algebra Systems – Robyn Pierce & Kaye Stacey

Student Difficulties in Abstracting Angle Concepts from Physical Activities with Concrete Materials – Anne Prescott, Michael Mitchelmore & Paul White

Children’s Difficulties with Base-Ten Numbers: “Face-Value” and “Independent-Place” Constructs – Peter Price

The Role of Professional Development in Using Calculators in a Sample of Queensland Primary Schools – Ian Putt & Mal McLean

Investigating Textbook Presentations of Ratio and Proportion – Mal Shield & Shelley Dole

Reflections on the Middle Years Numeracy Research Project – Is It a Case of Too Much Too Soon, For Too Many? – Di Siemon & Jo Virgona

Positioning the Personal in Mathematics Teacher Education Through Pedagogical Conversations – Tracey Smith

Further Evidence of Conceptual Difficulties with Decimal Notation – Vicki Steinle & Kaye Stacey

Exploring Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Mathematics – Peter Sullivan, Jo Virgona, Di Siemon, Maria Lasso

Contexts in Mathematics Teaching: Snakes or Ladders? – Peter Sullivan, Robyn Zevenbergen & Judith Mousley

Professional Development of Teachers of Mathematics Through Extended Collegial Dialogue: The ACT Mathematics Quality Teacher Program – Steve Thornton & Kerrie Blain

Preservice Work Within Schools: Teaching Knowledge in Production -Margaret Walshaw

Arithmetic and Quasi-variables: A Year 2 Lesson to Introduce Algebra in the Early Years – Elizabeth Warren & Tom Cooper

Variation as Part of Chance and Data in Grades 7 and 9 – Jane M. Watson & Ben A. Kelly

Research into Teacher Beliefs: Can the Past Stop Endless Repetition? – Allan Leslie White

Identifying Tasks that Promote Creative Thinking in Mathematics: A Tool – Gaye Williams

Spatial Reconstructions from Primary Children’s Drawings – Bernd Wollring

Boys’ Motivational Goals in Mathematics During the Transition from Single Sex Education to Co-Education – Shirley M. Yates

Validation of the New Zealand Number Framework – Jenny Young-Loveridge & Vince Wright

Short Communications & Round Tables

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a short communication or round table to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the abstracts which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the abstract submission

Submissions not exceeding one page are required for short communications and round tables. The submissions must be prepared using the conference template, and can include essential references. They will be reviewed by the Editorial Team and, if accepted, will be published in the conference proceedings as one-page abstracts (not as papers). Presenters are invited to prepare a paper for distribution at the conference, but these papers will not be included in the proceedings.

Short communications are suitable for reports on research in mathematics education that do not fully meet the requirements for published papers. These might include works in preliminary stages, reports of pilot projects, initial reviews of literature, ideas or suggestions for future study, and briefer discussions of particular issues. Short communications allow new researchers to obtain feedback on projects in a constructive and supportive environment, and foster the building of links between researchers with similar interests.

Short communications are presented by author(s) only, allocated half of the time for research reports (in past, this was 20 minutes). At least 5 minutes is to be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Round tables are suitable for presenters seeking involved interaction with the audience in relation to their research or topic of interest in mathematics education, and for those sharing their insights and advice with the early career colleagues. These might include discussion of an emerging topic, co-analysis of provided student work, solving a mathematical task, or discussing the demands and benefits of reviewing for high quality journals. Round tables allow finding peers with similar research interests, exploration of new research avenues, and building the capacity of MERGA community.

Round tables are led by author(s) only, allocated the same time as research reports (in past, this was 40 minutes). The abstracts should make clear the interactive element of the proposed activity, with no more than 15 min of the session time in a presentation mode.

Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award (BSPIA) recognises high-quality mathematics education that produces insights for the teaching profession and/or student learning.

The award consists of $500 and a plaque to be presented at the Conference.

Nomination process 

There are two ways a paper can be nominated for the BSPIA:

  • Self-nomination: When you submit your conference paper, check the box that asks if you would like to apply for the BSPIA.
  • Nomination via peer-review: Anyone who submits a Conference paper for peer-review will be considered for nomination by the reviewers. 

Single and co-authored papers are eligible for consideration.

When you write your paper, please ensure that you observe all general paper submission requirements including the maximum page length.

Judging process

Submissions must be deemed eligible for publication in the Conference proceedings by the initial reviewing panel. Submissions accepted for presentation only will be excluded from consideration.

The judging panel will consist of two MERGA members and two AAMT nominees and will be chaired by the VP Development.

The judging criteria are:

  • Identification of a persistent and significant research problem
  • Synthesis of recent research literature and relevant policy initiatives
  • Robust methodology producing valid, reliable findings
  • Insightful discussion of practical implications for the teaching profession and/or student learning
  • Clear, succinct style of academic writing

Winners are notified four weeks prior to the Conference and are invited to present a keynote at the annual conference.

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award page on this website provides further information, including the history of the award and recent winners.  

Research Papers

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research paper to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission

Research papers can take two major forms: 

1. Reports of 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.

2. 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.

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.

Structure of research papers – 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 not be more than the set length. 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.

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 as a Short Communication, with a 1-page abstract (which they will be invited to provide) being published in the proceedings. Papers may be rejected outright, with no opportunity for presentation at the conference in an alternative form.

Research Symposia

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research symposium to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template (to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website)
  • MERGA Publication Agreement (to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission)

Presentation of groups of published papers related by theme in the form of 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 symposium title, 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. Please list the symposium convenors as the authors on the first page, and name the paper authors in the text description.

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, usually within a 90 min block. At least 10 minutes must be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Early Career Research Award

In order to encourage new researchers in mathematics education, MERGA sponsors an award to an author in the early part of her/his career. The award, for excellence in writing and presenting a piece of mathematics education research, consists of a plaque and a prize of $500 and is presented at the annual conference. 

Applying for the award

Entry for the Early Career Research Award is by submission of a written paper for presentation at the conference through the Early Bird process. Conditions of eligibility, information about the judging process, and the criteria judges will observe are indicated below. If you are applying for the Early Career Research Award, please ensure that when you upload your paper on the conference website, you also send an email to the Conference Secretariat indicating that you are an entrant for the Early Career Research Award. Note that at some MERGA conferences there is also a form to complete or a box to tick on the registration form, so check the conference website carefully. Please note that co-authored papers ARE NOT eligible for entry into the Early Career Research Award, nor are Round Table or Symposium papers.

Rules and eligibility for the Early Career Award

The Early Career Research Award page on this website provides further information about this award, including a list of recent winners.

Early Bird Review Process

The Early Bird review process is a form of mentoring, principally for new researchers. However, anyone is eligible to make use of it. Research papers submitted through the Early Bird process must be received by the Early Bird due date (i.e., the closing date in January). They must meet the requirements as set out for MERGA Research Papers. Early Bird papers should be uploaded following a link on the conference website. Authors will be asked to create a login into Oxford Abstracts (our conference management system) and submit the blinded file (anonymised) in the correct template for review.

Early Bird papers undergo a double-blind MERGA reviewing process. There are three possible outcomes of the review, and actions the authors need to follow.

  1. When the paper is accepted (for presentation at the conference and publication in the proceedings), the authors will be asked to provide their full unblinded manuscript and publication agreement.
  2. When small revisions are required, the revised papers will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March. The changes are considered by the editors, and the papers are not usually sent out for review again. The editors decide whether the paper is accepted for publication as well as presentation at the conference.
  3. When more major revisions are required, the reviewers will provide the author/s with feedback on how to how to strengthen the paper. The paper will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March, and it will be sent out for a new double-blind review.

Authors are notified of the outcome as soon as possible (usually within a few weeks, and in time for resubmission). Letters are sent to authors to indicate (a) accepted for publication, (b) small revisions required, (c) or major rewriting required.