Volume 3,Issue 7
Supporting Algebraic Understanding: A Comparative Study of Secondary School Mathematics Texts
This study examines how algebra is conceptualised within the planned curriculum in England and China, focusing on how teaching materials support the development of algebraic thinking skills. The analysis drew on current teaching resources (Chinese textbooks and English lesson slides) in two nations. The findings revealed distinct pedagogical orientations toward fostering algebraic thinking. In England, the development of abstract thinking is supported through connections to real-world contexts and the use of multiple representations. In contrast, Chinese materials adopt a more formal and abstract approach, emphasising symbolic manipulation. Overall, the findings point to fundamentally different pedagogical traditions in algebraic notation instruction and distinctive approaches to linking arithmetic and algebraic thinking.
[1] Newton D, 1990, Teaching with Text: Choosing, Preparing and Using Textual Materials for Instruction.
[2] Vicente S, Sánchez R, Verschafel L, 2020, Word Problem Solving Approaches in Mathematics Textbooks: A Comparison between Singapore and Spain. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 35(3): 567–587.
[3] Alajmi A, 2012, How do Elementary Textbooks Address Fractions? A Review of Mathematics Textbooks in the USA, Japan and Kuwait. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2): 239–261.
[4] Zhu Y, Fan L, 2006, Focus on the Representation of Problem Types in Intended Curriculum: A Comparison of Selected Mathematics Textbooks from Mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4): 609–626.
[5] Fujita T, Jones K, 2002, Opportunities for the Development of Geometrical Reasoning in Current Textbooks in the UK and Japan. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 22(3): 79–84.
[6] Park K, Leung K, 2006, A Comparative Study of the Mathematics Textbooks of China, England, Japan, Korea, and the United States. Mathematics Education in Different Cultural Traditions: A Comparative Study of East Asia and the West, 227–238.
[7] Cai J, Knuth E, 2005, Introduction: The Development of Students’ Algebraic Thinking in Earlier Grades from Curricular, Instructional and Learning Perspectives. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 37(1): 1–4.
[8] Linchevski L, Livneh D, 1999, Structure Sense: The Relationship between Algebraic and Numerical Contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40(2): 173–196.
[9] Soneira C, 2022, The Use of Representations when Solving Algebra Word Problems and the Sources of Solution Errors. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(5): 1037–1056.
[10] Kaput J, Blanton M, Moreno L, 2008, Algebra from a Symbolization Point of View. Algebra in the Early Grades, 19–56.
[11] Hackenberg A, Lee M, 2015, Relationships between Students’ Fractional Knowledge and Equation Writing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(2): 196–243.
[12] Kaput J, 2008, What is Algebra? What is Algebraic Reasoning? Algebra in the Early Grades, 5–17.
[13] Hodgen J, Küchemann D, Brown M, 2010, Textbooks for the Teaching of Algebra in Lower Secondary School: Are They Informed by Research? Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5(3): 187–201.
[14] Sweller J, Van Merriënboer J, Paas G, 1998, Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3): 251–296.
[15] Hänze M, Leiss D, 2022, Using Heuristic Worked Examples to Promote Solving of Reality-Based Tasks in Mathematics in Lower Secondary School. Instructional Science, 50(4): 529–549.
[16] Ely R, Adams A, 2012, Unknown, Placeholder, or Variable: What is X? Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(1): 19–38.
[17] National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), 2000, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston.
[18] Sfard A, Linchevski L, 1994, The Gains and the Pitfalls of Reification: The Case of Algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2): 191–228.