2024 Conference Proceedings

CLEMENTS-FOYSTER LECTURE

A Deep Dive into Mathematics Education Research in Search of Significance – Janette Bobis

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Interventions and Development of Mathematics Education for Primary Schools – Mercy Kazima

Towards Embodied Validity in Mathematics Education Research – Nathalie Sinclair

BETH SOUTHWELL PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AWARD

Turn Left, Turn Right: An Embodied Perspective on Children’s Difficulties with Left/Right Spatial Orientations – Jennifer Way & Katherin Cartwright

RESEARCH SYMPOSIA

From Tensions to Opportunities: Evidencing Mathematics Leadership – Kate Copping, Natasha Ziebell, Matt Sexton, Ann Downton, Bernadette Pearce, Andrea O’Connor, Lauren Gould & Peter Grootenboer

Attending to Student Diversity in Mathematics Education in Inclusive Settings – Kate Quane, Matt Thompson, Catherine Attard, Kathryn Holmes, Lorraine Gaunt, Tom Porta, Melissa Fanshawe, Melissa Cain, & Bec Neill

Effective Mathematics Teaching: Building Partnerships to Co-Develop Evidence-Based Capability – Rose Wood, Rhonda Horne, Katie Makar, Merrilyn Goos, Terry Moran, Kyan Lambie, Rhonda Horne & Judith Hillman

RESEARCH PAPERS

Beyond Qualifications: Identity of Out-of-Field Teachers in Years 7–10 Mathematics in South Australia – Amie Albrecht & Lisa O’Keeffe

An Analysis of Multiplicative Thinking Development in Years 3 to 6 – Lei Bao & Max Stephens

Beliefs About the Active, Bodily Experience Mathematics Learning Activities: An Explorative Teacher Survey in Australia – Alessandra Boscolo

Classroom Expectations: Listen to the Maths – Jill Brown

Using the McNamara Fallacy to Critique (Mis)representations of “Success” in Mathematics Education – Rebecca Burtenshaw & Merrilyn Goos

Changes in Year 11 Mathematics Students’ Choices About the Use of a Computer Algebra System (CAS) to Solve Routine Problems – Scott Cameron, Lynda Ball & Vicki Steinle

What Kind of Mathematics Teacher is ChatGPT? Identifying the Pedagogical Practices Preferenced by Generative AI Tools When Preparing Lesson Plans – Scott Cameron & Carmel Mesiti

A School Mathematics Leader’s Account of her Leadership – Jill Cheeseman & Kerryn Driscoll

Australian Junior Secondary Students’ Approaches to Solving Ratio Problems Prior to Formal Instruction and Their Misconceptions – Michelle Cheung, Bronwyn Reid O’Connor & Ben Zunica

Developing Complex Unfamiliar Mathematics Questions: A Perspective – David Chinofunga & Philemon Chigeza

Potential Fraction Concept Images Afforded in Textbooks: A Comparison of Northern Ireland and Singapore – Ban Heng Choy & Pamela Moffett

Delving Deeply into Interviews with Timeline Tools – Ellen Corovic, Sharyn Livy & Ann Downton

Learning to Share Fairly: The Importance of Spatial Reasoning in Early Partitioning Experiences – Chelsea Cutting

Scripted Identities of the Mathematics Learner: Blurring Fiction and Fact in the Presentation of Research Data – Lisa Darragh & Alice Smith

Exploring Beliefs and Practices Towards Teaching Probability Using Games: A Case Study of one Fijian Secondary Mathematics Teacher – Hem Dayal, Krishan Kumar & Sashi Sharma

Secondary In-Service Mathematics Teachers’ Self-Reported Teaching Practices and Their Views on Using Games in Teaching – Hem Dayal, Sashi Sharma & Krishan Kumar

Mathematical Modelling for a Class Party: Challenges for Students in one Year 4 Classroom –Kym Fry, Judith Hillman, Rhonda Horne & Elizabeth Rasmussen

An Aesthetic Approach to Teaching Mathematics: A Proposed Framework Using Children’s Picture Books – Lorraine Gaunt, Mellie Green, Georgina Barton, Hannah Deehan & Danielle Sparrow

Harnessing the Expertise of Mathematics Intervention Teachers to Support Primary Teachers Through Co-Teaching Cycles – Ann Gervasoni, Ann Downton, Linda Flanagan, Kerry Giumelli, Anne Roche & Owen Wallis

Relationship Between Pre-Service Teachers’ Early Mathematics Experiences and Their Current Self-Perception on Mathematics  – Seyum Getenet, Saidat Adeniji & Melissa Fanshawe

Numeracy Across the Australian Curriculum: Opportunities from F to 6 – Seyum Getenet, Penelope Baker, Jill Fielding, Tracey Muir & Saidat Adeniji

Student Engagement with Dynamic Digital Representations of Decimal Fractions to Prompt Conceptual Change – Amelia Gorman

Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ Mathematical Competence  – Vesife Hatisaru, Julia Collins, Steven Richardson & Constantine Lozanovski

Teacher Expectations of Student Strategies for Algebra Problems – Vesife Hatisaru, Olivia Johnston, Julia Collins & Wendy Harmon

Learning Mathematics Through Sequences of Connected, Cumulative, and Challenging Tasks: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective – Jane Hubbard

Riding the Wave of COVID-19: The afterMATH  – Naomi Ingram & Trish Wells

Comprehending and Applying the First Isomorphism Theorem – Marios Ioannou

Development of Items to Assess Big Ideas of Equivalence and Proportionality – Jahangeer Mohamed Jahabar, Toh Tin Lam, Tay Eng Guan & Tong Cherng Luen

Roles of Mathematical and Statistical Models in Data-Driven Predictions in an Integrated STEM Context  – Takashi Kawakami & Akihiko Saeki

Reducing Mathematics and Examination Anxiety Using the Five Question Approach – John Ley

Incorporating Data Visualisation Into Teaching and Learning – Meng Li

The Assessment of Mathematical Proficiency in Written Exams: A Perspective From New South Wales (NSW)­ – Zehao Li

Conveyance Technology in Supporting the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics Through Student Reasoning and Problem Solving – Sharyn Livy

Primary Students’ Responses to a Cognitive Activation Lesson – Ciara Loughland, Janette Bobis & Jennifer Way

Pre-Service Teachers’ Use of Jump Strategy on the Empty Number Line When Recording Micro-Teaching Videos – Tarryn Lovemore

Defining the Problem in a Changing Landscape: How Leaders Plan for and Address Mathematics Curriculum Change – Margaret Marshman, Emily Ross, Anne Bennison & Merrilyn Goos

Factors that Influence Primary Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy While Teaching Mathematics During Professional Practice – Karen McDaid

Mathematics Written Feedback for Pre-Service Teachers During Professional Experience – Chrissy Monteleone & Monica Wong

Implementing Dialogic Pedagogies in Early Years Mathematics Teaching – Tracey Muir, Damon Thomas & Carol Murphy

Mathematics Teachers’ Beliefs and Pedagogical Approaches Regarding Creativity Within a Novel STEM Creativity Framework – Rowan Nas

Pre-Service Primary School Teachers’ Understanding of the Meaning of ‘Capacity’ in the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics – Erica Nguyen & Heather McMaster

Pre-Service Teachers’ Struggles With Core Numeracy Concepts – Kathy O’ Sullivan

Examining Students’ Mathematical Thinking: The Case of Porridge Words – Kate Quane

Flourishing Mathematics Teachers: The Effect of School-Based Placements on Preservice Secondary Mathematics Teachers Anticipated Job Enjoyment – Bronwyn Reid O’Connor & Ben Zunica

Engaging Multilingual Students in Frequent and Supported Opportunities for Discourse to Strengthen Their Mathematical Thinking – Rachel Restani, Margarita Jimenez-Silva, Tony Albano, Suzanne Abdelrahim, Robin Martin & Rebecca Ambrose

Catching the Translanguaging Wave: Considerations for Young Multilingual Learners’ Mathematical Meaning-Making – Sally-Ann Robertson & Mellony Graven

Teaching the Unexpected Mathematics: How Digital Technologies Unlocked Incidental Primary Mathematics Concepts – Emily Ross, Margaret Marshman & Natalie McMaster

Do Primary School Teachers Prefer Digital or Non-Digital Games to Support Mathematics Instruction? – James Russo & Anne Roche

Mathematics Lecturer’s Adaption to Online Teaching in Response to COVID-19 – Khalid Saddiq & Helen Chick

Raising Students’ Awareness and Actions Through a Sustainability Project – Soma Salim, Katie Makar & Jana Višňovská

Mathematics Leaders as Agents of Project Sustainability – Matt Sexton

Can a Short Online Test Diagnose Student Thinking? – Vicki Steinle, Kaye Stacey & Beth Price

Promoting Mathematical Reasoning in the Early Years Through Dialogic Talk – Anita Stibbard, Christine Edwards-Groves & Christina Davidson

Understanding of the Equal Sign: A Case of Chinese Grade 5 Students – Jiqing Sun, Xinghua Sun & Max Stephens

Out-of-School PSLE Mathematics Practice Books in Singapore – Teo Pei Pei & Berinderjeet Kaur

How Children who Speak Marathi Respond to the Introduction of Uncertain Language in a Statistical Investigation – Mitali Thatte & Katie Makar

Social Mathematical Practices in Multi-Digit Multiplication – Kristen Tripet

Preservice Primary Teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Fractions Using the Refined Consensus Model – Elise van der Jagt & Wendy Nielsen

Student Problem-Posing During Open Mathematical Inquiry – Kristin Zorn, Kym Fry, Kevin Larkin & Peter Grootenboer

ROUND TABLES

Supporting Out-of-Field Secondary Mathematics Teaching in NSW: A Multifaceted Project Design – Judy Anderson, Janette Bobis, Kathryn Holmes, Helen Watt & Paul Richardson

If Not With Fennema in the 1970s, Then When? – Helen Forgasz & Jennifer Hall

Arresting the Decline in Secondary School Mathematics Enrolments – Michael Jennings

Reflective Encounters Between Primary Pre-Service Teachers and a Mathematics Teacher Educator to Explore Critical Mathematics Teaching Approaches – Rosalie Miller & Julie Clark

Threshold Concepts in Primary Mathematics – Meredith Page & Julie Clark

Exploring the Culture of Out-of-Field Professional Education for Mathematics Teachers – Emily Ross, Merrilyn Goos, Susan Caldis, Connie Cirkony, Seamus Delaney, Janet Dutton, Linda Hobbs, Greg Oates & Christopher Speldewinde

Effective Pedagog(ies) in Mathematics: The Current State of Mathematics Education Practice and Research – Elise van der Jagt, Jill Fielding & Nadia Walker

World-Centred Mathematics Education: Theorising with Biesta – Jana Višňovská, Margaret Marshman & José Luis Cortina

Write Like a Reviewer: MERGA Conferences and Beyond – Jana Višňovská, Emily Ross, Seyum Getenet, Vince Geiger & Greg Oates

University Lecturers in Early Childhood Mathematics Education: Who are They? What are Their Professional Needs? – Jennifer Way, Laurinda Lomas, & Chrissy Monteleone

SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Using a Visual Representation Framework with Pre-Service Teachers to Analyse Place Value Representations – Tammy Booysen

Use of Newman Error Analysis Guidelines to Identify Pupils’ Errors in a Word Problem Involving Fractions – Elaine Yu Ling Cai

Supporting EAL/D Learners in Mathematics – Geraldine Caleta & Barbara McHugh

Supporting Out-of-Field Mathematics Teaching in Middle Years of Schooling – Philemon Chigeza & Subhashni Taylor

Revisiting Pedagogical Design Capacity: Mathematics Teachers’ Agency in Designing Instructional Materials – Sze Looi Chin, Ban Heng Choy & Yew Hoong Leong

Investigating High School Students Understanding of Decomposition Techniques in Mathematics – Michael Dennis

Students of Different Engagement and Achievement Levels Responses to Mathematics Lessons Involving Challenging Tasks – Maggie Feng, Janette Bobis, Jennifer Way & Bronwyn Reid O’Connor

Building Parental Capital in Supporting Early Literacy and Numeracy Learning – Mellony Graven & Robyn Jorgensen

What Would Make Mathematics More Interesting? Junior Secondary Student Perspectives – Kathryn Holmes, Matt Thompson & Erin Mackenzie

Teacher Professional Learning: The Interplay of External Stimuli, Social Dynamics, and Institutional Dimensions – Sally Hughes

Uncovering the Complexities of Mathematical Problem-Solving Instruction: An In-Depth Analysis of a Mathematical Problem-Solving Lesson for Low-Progress Primary School Students – Kwan Yu Heng Kenneth

Understanding Australian Teachers’ Conceptualisation of Angle – John Lawton

Supporting the Development of Language and Collaborative Competencies for International Students in 1st Year Mathematics – Kim Locke & Lisa Darragh

On the Necessity of Multimodal Semiotic Approaches for the Analysis of Young Children’s Mathematical Drawings – Andrea Maffia & Ann Downton

Analysing the Use of Hands-on Tasks to Develop Student Talk and Collaboration – Carol Murphy, Tracey Muir, & Damon Thomas

Mathematics Homework: The Importance of Pitch – Lisa O’Keeffe & Amie Albrecht

Enrolment Trends in Queensland Senior Advanced Mathematics: Comparisons for Socio-Economic Advantage and Regions­ – Chris Powell

Froebel Meets OpenSCAD: Pre-Service Teachers Form Units in Notes for Children and in Instructions for 3D Cube Constructions – Simone Reinhold & Bernd Wollring

Scaffolding Structured Inquiry Learning Through ‘Spotlighting’ – James Russo, Jane Hubbard, Carly Millichap & Alana Brandholz

Mathematics Education Researchers’ Perspectives on Implications of Their Research for Primary Teachers – James Russo, Jane Hubbard & Anne Roche

Enhancing Problem-Solving Skills Among Low-Progress Students in Singapore: Leveraging Variation Theory in Mathematics Education – Tan Chek Khai Rayner

We All Know Fun Maths – But Where is the Theoretical Foundation?  – Laura Tuohilampi

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

Short communications are suitable for reports 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.

Abstracts are required for short communications and round tables. They must be prepared using the conference template. The abstracts will be reviewed by the Editorial Team and, if accepted, will be published in the conference proceedings. Presenters are invited to prepare a paper for distribution at the conference, but these papers will not be included in the proceedings.

Presentation of short communications – Short communications are presented by author(s) only. At least 5 minutes is to be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

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. (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.

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

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.