by
1999
KEYWORDS
ii
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to analyse aspects of mental computation within
primary school mathematics curricula and to formulate recommendations to inform
future revisions to the Number strand of mathematics syllabuses for primary
schools. The analyses were undertaken from past, contemporary, and futures
perspectives. Although this study had syllabus development in Queensland as a
prime focus, its findings and recommendations have an international applicability.
Little has been documented in relation to the nature and role of mental
computation in mathematics curricula in Australia (McIntosh, Bana, & Farrell, 1995,
p. 2), despite an international resurgence of interest by mathematics educators.
This resurgence has arisen from a recognition that computing mentally remains a
viable computational alternative in a technological age, and that the development of
mental procedures contributes to the formation of powerful mathematical thinking
strategies (R. E. Reys, 1992, p. 63). The emphasis needs to be placed upon the
mental processes involved, and it is this which distinguishes mental computation
from mental arithmetic, as defined in this study. Traditionally, the latter has been
concerned with speed and accuracy rather than with the mental strategies used to
arrive at the correct answers.
In Australia, the place of mental computation in mathematics curricula is only
beginning to be seriously considered. Little attention has been given to teaching, as
opposed to testing, mental computation. Additionally, such attention has
predominantly been confined to those calculations needed to be performed mentally
to enable the efficient use of the conventional written algorithms. Teachers are
inclined to associate mental computation with isolated facts, most commonly the
basic ones, rather than with the interrelationships between numbers and the
methods used to calculate. To enhance the use of mental computation and to
achieve an improvement in performance levels, children need to be encouraged to
value all methods of computation, and to place a priority on mental procedures.
This requires that teachers be encouraged to change the way in which they view
iii
iv
strategies appropriate for focussed teaching for each of the four operations has
been delineated.
The implications for teachers with respect to these recommendations are
discussed. Their implementation has the potential to severely threaten many
teachers sense of efficacy. To support the changed approach to developing
competence with mental computation, aspects requiring further theoretical and
empirical investigation are also outlined.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
KEYWORDS................................................................................................................ i
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. v
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................xii
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................xiv
ABBREVIATIONS..................................................................................................... xv
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP ..........................................................xvi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .........................................................................................xvii
CHAPTER 1
1.1
1.2
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.3
1.4
1.4.2
CHAPTER 2
MENTAL COMPUTATION
2.1
Introduction ..................................................................................................... 27
2.2
Research Questions........................................................................................ 29
2.3
Numeracy .......................................................................................... 31
2.3.2
Computation ...................................................................................... 32
vi
2.3.3
2.3.4
Learning Mathematics....................................................................... 35
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.5.4
2.6.2
2.6.3
2.7
2.7.2
Conceptual Components................................................................... 68
2.7.3
2.7.4
2.7.5
2.8
2.9
2.8.2
2.8.3
2.8.4
2.9.2
vii
2.9.3
2.9.4
2.10 Summary and Implications for Mental Computation Curricula ...................... 139
2.11 Concluding Points ......................................................................................... 150
CHAPTER 3:
3.1
3.2
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.3
Terms Associated with the Calculation of Exact Answers Mentally .............. 178
3.4
3.5
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.5.2
3.5.3
3.6
3.7
viii
CHAPTER 4
4.1
4.1.2
4.2
4.3
Discussion....................................................................................... 302
Limitations of Findings................................................................ 303
Conclusions ................................................................................ 303
Concluding Points....................................................................... 317
4.4
4.4.2
4.4.3
ix
CHAPTER 5
5.1
5.2
5.1.2
5.2.2
5.3
5.3.2
5.3.3
5.4
CHAPTER 6:
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
A.1
A.2
A.3
A.4
A.5
A.6
A.7
A.8
A.9
A.10
A.11
A.12
A.13
APPENDIX C
Section 1
Beliefs About Mental Computation and How It Should Be Taught ... 457
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
APPENDIX D
SURVEY CORRESPONDENCE
D.1
D.2
D.3
D.4
D.5
xi
LIST OF TABLES
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
xii
4.11
4.14
4.15
4.16
4.17
4.18
4.19
Textbooks Specific to Mental Computation Used During the Period 19641987............................................................................................................ 302
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
4.1
Position of means for items relating to the beliefs about the nature of mental
computation an a traditional-nontraditional continuum ............................... 282
4.2
Position of means for items relating to beliefs about the general approach to
teaching mental computation an a traditional-nontraditional continuum ..... 284
4.3
4.4
4.5
Position of means for items relating to teaching practices used during the
periods 1964-1968, 1969-1974, 1975-1987 on traditional-nontraditional
continua. ..................................................................................................... 297
4.6
Means for selected teaching practices and the beliefs which underpin them
for middle and upper school teachers......................................................... 312
5.1
xiv
ABBREVIATIONS
AAMT
AEC
CDC
MSEB
NCSM
NCTM
NCMWG
NRC
QSCO
xv
Signed: G. R. Morgan
Date:
12 January 1998
xvi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study would not have been completed without the advice, support and cooperation of a number of people towards whom I wish to formally express my
appreciation. Principal among these are:
CHAPTER 1
1.1
These beliefs imply that computational skill per se can no longer be considered
an adequate measure of achievement in mathematics. Nonetheless, computational
competence remains an important goal of mathematics programs in primary
classrooms. This goal, however, involves more than the routine application of
memorised rules. It involves children in developing:
Such development is consistent with Williss (1995) advocacy for a curriculum that
reflects the learning of mathematics which is significant and of value for an
individual's success in both private and professional endeavours.
The ability to calculate exact as well as approximate answers mentally is
essential to the repertoire of skills for computational competence in the 1990s and
beyond (AEC, 1991, p. 109). However, the development of an ability to arrive at
exact answers mentally without the aid of external calculating or recording
devicesmental computation (R. E. Reys, B. J. Reys, Nohda, & Emori, 1995, p.
304)is one that has generally been neglected, or at least de-emphasised, in
classrooms during recent years, both in Australia and overseas (Koenker, 1961, p.
295; McIntosh, 1990a, p. 25; Shibata, 1994, p. 17; Trafton, 1978, p. 199; Wiebe,
1987, p. 57). French (1987) suggests that "one reason for the lack of interest [in
mental computation] is the association that [this] has with the daily mental tests
once used universally in schools, with their emphasis on recall of facts and speed"
(p. 39). This emphasis characterised the mental arithmetic programs that were
regularly conducted in classrooms as precursors to the main focus of arithmetic
lessons: the development of the standard written algorithms for the four basic
operations.
Given that it is essential that the development of an ability to calculate exact
answers mentally gains greater prominence in classroom mathematics programs
(Gough, 1993, p.2) and that little research relevant to its development has been
1.2
occurred, it is necessary to give consideration to (a) the nature and role of mental
computation in past mathematics curricula; (b) the reasons for the contemporary
resurgence of interest in mental computation; (c) its place within current
mathematics programs; (d) the degree to which students show proficiency with
calculating exact answers mentally; (e) the essential changes to the ways in which
mental computation is viewed by teachers and students, changes regarded as
critical for mental computation to fulfil the roles for which it is envisaged; and (f)
issues related to mental computation in need of further clarification.
form of mental activity, including mental arithmetic" (Reys & Barger, 1994, pp. 3233). This was despite such beliefs as those of Suzzallo who, in 1911, contended
that:
Hall (1954, p. 349) observed that it was unfortunate that mental arithmetic
should also have been discredited. However, the Theory of Mental Discipline's
promise of transfer of knowledge through exercising each general faculty was
questioned when it was shown that learning arithmetic (and Latin) did not facilitate
learning other subjects. Its demise was accentuated by "the rise of associationism
as a dominant psychological account of mental functioning" (Resnick, 1989a, p. 8).
Similar concerns to those of the mid-nineteenth century began to be expressed
during the 1930s in the United States, with respect to the perceived
overdependence on written methods of calculation. The rationale for a renewed
emphasis on mental (oral) methods was one of social utility, namely, that mental
arithmetic was more useful outside the classroom than were paper-and-pencil
procedures (B. J. Reys, 1985, p. 44). This advocacy for an emphasis on mental
computation coincided with attempts to improve instruction in mathematics, such as
Brownell's (1935) promotion of the meaning theory of arithmetic instruction.
Reflected in these recommendations were the beginnings of a shift in the
philosophic orientation in teaching mathematics, away from drill and practice
towards discovery learning and independent inquiry (Reys & Barger, 1994, p. 34).
During the 1940s and early 1950s there was an increased emphasis on mental
computation until the concern for developing an understanding of mathematical
structure gained prominence during the New Mathematics era in the late 1950s to
mid-1970s. During this period the issue of paper-and-pencil versus mental
The revival of interest in mental computation since the late 1970s initially
coincided with, and was strengthened by, a reevaluation of what constitutes school
mathematics as a reaction by the mathematics education community to the Back to
Basics movement, principally in the United States (NCSM, 1977; National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM], 1980). Together with this reevaluation was "a
growing realization that many students apply written algorithms mechanically, with
little sense as to why, how, or what they are doing" (B. J. Reys, 1985, p. 44), an
echo of previous calls for a renewed interest in mental computation. However, the
relative importance and the nature of mental computation as now proposed differ
markedly from the oral arithmetic of the past that emphasised oral drill"mental
gymnastics" in Koenker's (1961, pp. 295-296) viewrather than exploration and
discussion.
Despite the similarities in the goals for developing mental computational skills,
as expressed by Hall (1954) and Robert Reys (1984), there are marked differences
in the nature of mental computation as now envisaged and in the ways that such
skills should be developed. The current thrust, which had its beginnings in the late
1970s, has a broader focus than earlier movements. Besides highlighting a
recognition of the applicability of the constructivist theory of learning to the
development of mathematical abilities, it also emphasises the belief that paper-andpencil skills, particularly the traditional written algorithms, should receive decreased
attention (B. J. Reys, 1991, p. 7). Additionally, it also gives recognition to the gulf
between learning and practising school mathematics and learning and practising the
mathematics used outside the classroom, a focus that centres on the utility of school
mathematics in the society of the 1990s (Masingila, Davidenko, Prus-Wisniowska, &
Agwu, 1994, p. 3).
The present interest in mental computation coincides with a need to redefine
the way in which calculations are performed, particularly as a consequence of the
availability of calculators and computers. As McIntosh (1990a) points out, "none of
[the previous] pendulum shifts [has] suggested other than that mental computation
[be] the bridesmaid of written computation" (p. 36). This was despite such contrary
views for their time as those of Branford (cited by McIntosh, 1990a) who suggested,
in 1908, that "mental arithmetic should come first and form the solid food: written
arithmetic should be the luxury, given where and when it can be appreciated" (p.
36), a view now promoted, given the influence of technological calculating devices,
as well as for pedagogical reasons.
With respect to the latter, the Mathematical Sciences Education Board and the
National Research Council (1990, p. 19) believe that there is now sufficient
evidence to suggest that an overemphasis on paper-and-pencil skills may hinder a
child's effective use of mental techniques for calculating. Mental computation is
increasingly being considered as an essential prerequisite to the successful
development of written algorithms (R. E. Reys, 1984, p. 549). This is in marked
contrast to the traditional view of the place of mental computation within the
mathematics curriculum.
A "novel facet of [the current] revival is the interest in using mental computation
as a vehicle for promoting thinking, conjecturing and generalizing based on
conceptual understanding rather than as a set of skills which serve as an end of
instruction" (Reys & Barger, 1994, p. 31). By focusing on conceptual understanding
rather than on the memorisation of rules, the manipulation of quantities rather than
symbols, in Reed and Laves' (1981, p. 442) terms, is involved. Rathmell and
Trafton (1990) assert that:
The varied and thoughtful ways children manipulate quantities when doing
mental computation promote number sense as well as mathematical thinking.
This kind of activity brings a dynamic quality to learning mathematics because
children are actually doing mathematics rather than learning to repeat
conventional procedures. (p. 157)
During this process, children construct their own mathematical knowledge that
not only enhances learning but also encourages them to view mathematics as
meaningful, rather than as a collection of arbitrarily derived rules. Children are
compelled to seek novel ways to use numbers and number relations, methods that
are likely to increase an understanding of the structure of the number system
(Sowder, 1992, p. 15). Ironically, although the development of an understanding of
10
mathematical structure was an important goal of the new maths movement, mental
computation was virtually ignored in the syllabuses of the 1960s and 1970s, despite
such beliefs as those espoused, in the United States, by Beberman (1959, cited by
Josephina, 1960). He asserted that:
However, those who are proficient at mathematics in daily life, and in the
workplace, seldom make use of the standard written algorithms during mental
calculations. Rather, idiosyncratic methods are used or else the written algorithms
are adapted in unique ways (Cockcroft, 1982, p. 75, para 256). People are involved
11
with, what Maier (1980, pp. 21-23) calls, folk mathematics or, what Howson and
Wilson (1986, p. 21) term, ethnomathematics. The methods used differ with the
situation in which an arithmetical problem is to be solved (Carraher, Carraher, &
Schliemann, 1987, p. 83). Further, Lave (1985, p. 173) suggests that the
organisation of arithmetic varies qualitatively from one situation to another. It
appears that algorithms taught in schools are only likely to be used to solve schooltype problems, with little transfer to real-life problem situations (Carraher et al.,
1987, p. 95). Conversely, self-taught strategies used in every-day situations are
unlikely to be used by children in the classroom without specific encouragement by
teachers (Gracey, 1994, p. 75).
While school mathematics remains largely oriented towards paper-and-pencil
algorithms, folk mathematics predominantly involves mental calculations and
algorithms that lend themselves to mental use. Calculators and computers are used
for the more difficult and cumbersome calculations, with paper-and-pencil
procedures considered as final choices (Maier, 1980, p. 22). Therefore for school
mathematics to become more meaningful and useful in non-classroom situations an
emphasis needs to be placed on encouraging children "to develop personal mental
computational strategies, to experiment with and compare strategies used by others,
and to choose from amongst their available strategies to suit their own strengths
and the particular context" (AEC, 1991, p. 109).
12
calculating mentally (Cockcroft, 1982, pp. 74-75, para 254). One reason for this is
that the nature of mental computation, when viewed as a higher-order thinking
process, does not facilitate the delineation of a fixed scope and sequence (R. E.
Reys, 1992, p. 69). The encouragement of mental computation through textbooks,
therefore, becomes an even more difficult task. Strategies for computing mentally
are naturally developed through discussion and exploration (R. E. Reys, 1992, p.
70). This implies that a less structured approach to lesson design than that
traditionally used to develop the written algorithms is imperative, a requirement that
necessitates changes to the teaching practices of many teachers.
In Australia, the place of mental computation in mathematics curricula is only
beginning to be seriously considered (AEC, 1991, pp. 106-134). As McIntosh
(1990a, p. 25) has observed, little attention has been given to teaching mental
computation, with such attention predominantly confined to those calculations
needed to be performed mentally to enable the efficient use of the conventional
written algorithms. Teachers are inclined to associate mental computation with
isolated facts, usually the basic ones, rather than "with networks of relationships
between numbers or with methods of computation" (McIntosh, 1990a, p. 25).
Further, in Atweh's (1982, p. 57) view, teachers often discourage mental calculation
by insisting that children write down their solutions so that each individual step may
be detailed. This expectation may stem from the belief that children are not
productively engaged in mathematics unless they are writing, or, it may be a
classroom management procedure designed to enable the teacher to retain control
over the pace of a lesson.
In the Queensland context, the need for an emphasis on mental computation is
not inconsistent with many recommended teaching practices. Associated with the
implementation of the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of
Education, 1987a) emphasis is being given to issues relevant to the development of
the ability to calculate exact answers mentally. It is believed that learning is
enhanced by (a) teaching through problem solving, (b) encouraging children to
explore and discuss mathematical ideas with their peers and teachers, and (c)
accepting a range of solutions as well as various strategies for arriving at a
particular solution (Department of Education, 1987b, pp. 3-4).
Further, the need to develop a range of strategies for arriving at approximate
answers is being emphasised. Strategies for calculating exact answers mentally,
13
14
limited in scope, suggest that Australian children may not be as biased against
mental computation, even though little instruction is undertaken. Gracey (1994, p.
113) found that mental computation was the most commonly preferred option for
calculating one-step multiplication items, 945 x 100 for example, by a class of Year
6 children. Similar findings are reported for all four basic operations by McIntosh et
al. (1995, p. 12). For children who did not prefer to calculate such items as 100 x 35
mentally, it was concluded that this was due to a lack of conceptual understanding
rather than a lack of computational skill (McIntosh et al., 1995, p. 11-12).
Results from the United States Third National Mathematics Assessment reveal
that the ability of nine year-old children to compute mentally is only beginning to
emerge, with performance levels on such items as 6 + 47, 36 + 9 and 90 x 3 being
below 50% correct (R. E. Reys, 1985, p. 15). Barbara Reys (1991, p. 3) suggests
that this may be because children of this age are primarily concerned, in present
curricula, with developing the written algorithms and that this emphasis may
interfere with their ability to compute mentally, which requires an abstract and
flexible manipulation of numbers. For the nine year-old children and the 13 yearolds, a wide range of performances was recorded: Twenty percent correct for 36 - 9
to 52% correct for 64 + 20 (nine year-olds), and 32% correct for 60 15 to 92%
correct for 700 - 600 (13 year-olds). Addition was the easiest operation, with
division being the most difficult (R. E. Reys, 1985, p. 15).
In contrast, results from Periodiek Peilings Onderzoek in The Netherlands
indicate 70% to 90% accuracy on items similar to those of the Third National
Mathematics Assessment (Treffers, 1991, p. 336). Dutch 13 year-olds scored
approximately 90% correct on 480 6 and 7 x 90, and on 600 300 and 20 x 2400
about 70%. While these scores are superior to those of the United States, Treffers
(1991) concluded that "rather than being proud of our students' achievement, [Dutch
educators] should draw the general conclusion...that mental arithmetic badly needs
improvement" (p. 336).
Barbara Reys et al. (1993) report similar results to those of the National
Assessment from research undertaken with a sample of children in the second, fifth
and seventh grades in Texas and Saskatchewan. For each of these year-levels,
performances on applied problems were also quite low. For six of the 10 items,
Grade 2 children scored below 20% correct. This may reflect their relative lack of
experience with problem solving and particularly with tests in which items are paced
15
(B. J. Reys et al., 1993, p. 309). Although a narrower range of performances was
evident for children in Grades 5 and 7, for most items a success rate of
approximately 10% was achieved. The highest percentage correct for Grade 5 was
32% for the item: "Chuck's family lives 100km from Chicago. They stop after driving
65km. How much farther do they have to go?" (B. J. Reys et al., 1993, p. 311).
Chaining of addition and subtraction was difficult for both Grade 2 and Grade 5
children who also dropped in performance where chaining of multiplication was
involved (B. J. Reys et al., 1993, p. 310). Examples such as 75 + 85 + 25 + 2000
(fifth grade) require partial values to be mentally retained for later computation, a
skill that is not developed during the traditional focus on paper-and-pencil skills.
For performance levels in mental computation to rise, children need to be
encouraged to calculate mentally and to develop a range of strategies for carrying
out such calculations. They also must develop an appreciation of when it is
appropriate to calculate mentally, in context with their abilities, and in so doing
develop the confidence to use mental procedures. Such confidence appears to be
seriously lacking at this time. R. E. Reys et al. (1995, p. 323) conclude that this is a
theme that appears to be common across various school systems. Flournoy (1959,
p. 134), following a survey of children's use of mathematics across a 7 day period,
concluded that greater use of mental arithmetic would be made if they felt confident
in solving number situations without paper-and-pencil. Of relevance to this finding is
that of Case and Sowder (1990) with respect to computational estimation. They
concluded that the lack of confidence children exhibit in their mathematical abilities
results from the "split...between the understanding of number that children glean
from their everyday quantitative activity and the school-based algorithms they learn
to execute" (Case & Sowder, 1990, p. 100). This conclusion has implications for
how mental computation is defined and for how it is to be taught.
Children need to make appropriate choices between applying paper-and-pencil
procedures, mental calculations and the use of a calculator. Data from the Third
National Mathematics Assessment indicate that on items considered appropriate for
mental computation most 13 year-old students preferred to use either paper-andpencil or a calculator. For example, for 4 x 99, although 44% indicated that they
would "Do it in their heads, 39% would use paper-and-pencil and 16% would use a
calculator (R. E. Reys, 1985, p. 15). A similar pattern of preferred methods for
calculating items whose structure encourages mental calculation is reported by B. J.
16
Reys et al. (1993, p. 310) for children in Grades 5 and 7, with the majority preferring
to employ paper-and-pencil for all except 1000 x 945, a fifth grade example. The
preference for written methods rather than calculator use is also reported by Gracey
(1994, p. 113) and reflects the emphasis on written procedures in the classroom.
17
18
1.3
answers mentally places the child at the centre of the learning process. This
highlights that the advocacy for an increased emphasis on mental computation goes
well beyond simply focussing on it as a computational method per se. While it is
important for mental computation, and the use of calculators, to receive greater
emphasis in the calculative process, with a concomitant de-emphasis on the
standard written algorithms, a focus on the relationships between the development
of idiosyncratic thinking strategies and the development of number sense and
numeracy is of equal importance.
By undertaking (a) an analysis of past and present syllabuses, from a mental
computation perspective, and (b) a survey of Queensland school personnel, issues
related to these recommendations are able to be placed in context with beliefs and
19
teaching practices, both past and current. This should lead to an enriched context
in which these issues can be debated from a Queensland perspective, issues which
encompass aspects of the areas of needed research identified by Barbara Reys and
Barger (1994, p. 45), and Robert Reys and Nohda (1994, p. 5). Consequently, the
principal purposes of this study, in accordance with the aims delineated in Section
1.1, were:
20
1.4
21
n.d., p. 1).
22
one that relates directly to its teaching in Queensland state schools. These
approaches entailed undertaking:
1. A literature review, the aim of which was to analyse the pedagogical, socioanthropological and psychological literature relevant to mental computation.
2. An analysis of Queensland syllabuses in relation to the nature and function
of mental computation within Queensland primary school curricula from
1860, with particular emphasis on the period 1860-1965 during which
Queensland mathematics syllabuses made specific references to the
mental calculation of exact answers.
3. A survey, using a postal, self-completion questionnaire, of Queensland
state primary school teachers and administrators, from a random sample of
Queensland state schools, to ascertain their beliefs and teaching practices
pertaining to mental computation.
4. A synthesis of the data from the first three approaches, the aim of which
was to highlight similarities and differences in beliefs and practices
concerning the nature and function of, and teaching methods related to,
mental computation. In so doing it was aimed to provide recommendations
for future action with respect to syllabus revision in Queensland, the key
element of which is the proposed mental computation strand for future
mathematics syllabuses.
Chapter 2:
Mental Computation
23
Chapter 3:
Chapter Four:
1. What beliefs do teachers currently hold with respect to the nature and role
of mental computation and how it should be taught?
24
Chapter Five:
Chapter Six:
27
CHAPTER 2
MENTAL COMPUTATION
2.1
Introduction
Although "many of the fundamental ideas which underpin the school
28
provide memory support, are the most appropriate. Elevating the importance of
mental computation (and calculator use) in school mathematics is a recognition of
the central role of such calculation outside the classroom. As Cockcroft (1982)
comments: "In almost all jobs the ability to carry out some calculations mentally is of
value and lack of ability to do this is a frequent cause of complaint by employers" (p.
20, para 71). Therefore, there is a need for positive attitudes towards mental
computation to be fostered in classrooms (J. P. Jones, 1988, p. 42), a view
supported by the performance data referred to in Section 1.2.4.
The importance of a focus on mental computation does not merely centre on its
role as a computational procedure per se. Barbara Reys et al. (1993, p. 314)
suggest that mental computation is a vehicle for developing each of the curriculum
standards with respect to problem solving, reasoning, number sense and
communication. These standards, which are in accord with recommendations
contained in A National Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schools (AEC,
1991), were proposed by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989, p.
2) as a means for indicating educational goals, ensuring quality of teaching, and
promoting change in education. Mental computation, as now perceived, is
considered to be a more creative activity than that embodied in what has been
traditionally called mental arithmetic (Curriculum Programmes Branch, 1989, p. 26),
where the focus was primarily on the correctness of the answer rather than on the
mental methods employed. Joy Jones (1988, p. 44) suggests that the real value of
emphasising mental procedures is the development of the soundness of number
that comes from considering a variety of methods. Indeed, mental computation
constitutes the process most readily available to assist in the understanding of how
numbers operate (McIntosh, 1990a, p. 37). Additionally, the thinking that is involved
facilitates the growth of a sense for computational routines (B. J. Reys, 1985, p. 43).
Number sense and the ability to calculate exact and approximate answers
mentally evolve concurrently, with each supporting the development of the other.
Children who are adept at mental computation can flexibly use a rich variety of
reasoning strategies (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 96). This ability is firmly grounded in
their sense of number, their drive and capacity to formulate and apply logical
connections between new and previously acquired information (B. J. Reys, 1992, p.
94). It follows, therefore, that effective mental methods cannot be acquired by rote
learning (French, 1987, p. 39). Indeed, mental computation helps prevent a reliance
29
2.2
Research Questions
In Robert Reys' (1992, pp. 65-66) view, a child's ability to reason
30
2. What is the place of mental computation within the calculative process and
particularly its relationships with computational estimation?
3. What is the nature of mental computation as perceived by mathematics
educators, both contemporaneously and historically?
4. What are the roles currently perceived for mental computation within and
beyond the classroom?
5. What are the affective and cognitive components, including commonly used
mental strategies, that constitute skill in computing exact answers
mentally?
6. What are the affective and cognitive characteristics exhibited by skilled
mental calculators, including the role that memory plays in the process of
calculating exact answers mentally?
7. What are the teaching approaches and sequence necessary for the
development of mental computation skills?
2.3
31
around which systems and schools may build their mathematics curriculum....It is
descriptive rather than prescriptive" (AEC, 1991, p. 1). This is in contrast to
England's national curriculum, which has legislative status for the teaching and
learning of mathematics (NCMWG, 1988). Whatever the nature of the statements
for the future of mathematics education, given the close contact between
mathematics educators throughout the world, together with the increasing
interdependence of nations, there are many issues of agreement and common
concern, issues that centre on the concept of numeracy, computation, number
sense and learning mathematics.
2.3.1 Numeracy
The development of numeracy (or mathematical literacy) is commonly held as
a key purpose for studying mathematics in school. Willis (1990, p. 9) considers
such development to be a service to students. It should equip them with skills and
understandings necessary for successfully dealing with other aspects of their
livesin the home, in the workforce and across the curriculum. As the technological
demands in relation to work and social interactions within a society increase, the
way in which numeracy is conceptualised also needs modification (NRC, 1989, p.
8).
This suggests that a wide definition needs to be formulated. In common with
recommendations of the Cockcroft Report (1982, pp. 10-11, paras 35-39) and the
position paper by the National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics (1989), the
Queensland Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a,
p. 2) suggests that although there is a continuing need for students to develop
competence and confidence in computational skills, they also need to develop a
much broader competency, one that includes an ability to apply understandings of
number, space and measurement in realistic situations, both familiar and unfamiliar,
to be able to use a range of technological aids, and to recognise the
reasonableness of results.
2.3.2 Computation
32
In the late 1970s Girling (1977) provocatively, for that time, defined basic
numeracy as "the ability to use a four-function electronic calculator sensibly" (p. 4).
Whereas the accepted view of numeracy is now much broader than this, as
delineated above, Girling's statement draws attention to the profound effect that the
availability of calculators (with computers and other electronic calculating devices)
has had on society and therefore on the features of school mathematics relevant to
the present technological age.
Australia's national statements on the use of calculators in schools (AAMT,
1996a; Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers & Curriculum Development
Centre [AAMT & CDC], 1987) reflect the commonly held belief that school
mathematics needs to capitalise upon the power of the calculator. The statement
not only recommends that all students at all year levels (P-12) should use
calculators, but that they should be used both as an instructional aid and as a
computational tool during the learning process across the curriculum.
The impact of electronic calculating devices on the nature of calculation within
present western societies requires the number strands of mathematics curricula to
be reassessed. This applies particularly to their goals and to the computational
procedures with which children are expected to become proficient. Rathmell and
Trafton (1990) assert that because "most complex computation is now done by
calculators and computers...paper-and-pencil procedures can no longer be the
focus of computation in the curriculum" (p. 54). Such a view is not new. Before the
calculator (and personal computer) age, Biggs (1969) cautioned that "we must be
quite clear...about out [sic] purpose in continuing to include written computational
practice as a part of the primary school curriculum, as this will determine the nature
and extent of this aspect of the work" (p. 25). To the extent that written algorithms
continue to be taught they need to be ones that are relatively easy to learn and be
ones that assist in the development of concepts and processes (Lindquist, 1984, pp.
602-603).
With the implementation of the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus
(Department of Education, 1987a) in Queensland in 1988 a greater emphasis is
given to the use of calculators, at least at the level, in Howson and Wilson's (1986,
p. 37) terms, of the intended curriculum. Some written algorithms have been
deleted from the primary school curriculummultiplication of common
fractionswhereas others have been delayeddivision by two-digit numbers.
33
What we all need to become, are thinking calculators with an ability to adapt
and improvise methods and to test quickly the reliability of results produced by
machines. And we need, now more than ever in this calculator age, a welldeveloped and flexible sense of number. (McIntosh, 1990a, p. 31)
Although number sense cannot be defined precisely (Hope, 1989, p. 12), and
is dependent upon the number system being used (Sowder, 1992, p. 6), Howden
(1989) suggests that it can be described "as good intuition about numbers and their
34
relationships" (p. 11). It may be elusive and difficult to pin down (Greeno, 1991, p.
36), but there are identifiable characteristics in the behaviour of those who have a
well developed feel for number. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
(1989, pp. 39-40) believes that children with good number sense (a) have wellunderstood number meanings, (b) have developed multiple relationships among
numbers, (c) recognise the relative magnitudes of numbers, (d) know the relative
effects of operating on numbers, and (e) have developed referents for measures of
common objects and situations within their environment. Sowder (1992, pp. 5-6)
and Resnick (1989b, p. 36) extend this list to include the ability to (a) perform mental
computations with nonstandard strategies that take advantage of the ability to
compose and decompose numbers, (b) use numbers flexibly to estimate numerical
answers to computations and to realise when as estimate is appropriate, and (c)
judge the reasonableness of solutions obtained, dependent upon their belief that
mathematics makes sense and that they are capable of finding sense in a numerical
situation.
Whereas the development of number sense is something that has always
occurred in many classrooms, the pivotal role that it plays in the ability of individuals
to respond flexibly and creatively to number situations requires its development to
be viewed as a major goal of primary school mathematics (AEC, 1991, p. 107;
MSEB & NRC, 1990, p. 46). Markovits (1989, p. 78) suggests that when students
with number sense are given a mathematical task, they are expected to have in
mind that there is not always one answer, that there is not always one algorithm,
that mathematics and real life are related, and that decisions and judgements are
expected.
Further, students with number sense tend to analyse the whole problem first,
rather than immediately applying a standard algorithm. They look for relationships
among the numbers, and with the operations and contexts involved. The
computational procedure chosen or invented takes advantage of these observed
relationships. At each step in the solution process individuals with number sense
seem to be aware of the mathematical reasonableness of what is being done and of
the answers obtained (Markovits, 1989, p. 79). Hence, Carroll (1996, p. 3) suggests
that an individuals number sense can be assessed through an analysis of the
mental strategies used when calculating.
35
Such beliefs place the child at the centre of the learning process where
personally meaningful solutions can be developed. Mathematical power is gained.
This requires classroom environments to be "cultures of sense-making" (MSEB &
NRC, 1990, p. 32), environments in which the mathematics presented is seen to be
predictable, purposeful and personally relevant. That this view of mathematics was
not an outcome of the curricula of the new maths era was one factor in their failure
to meet the goals set, particularly those with respect to developing positive attitudes
towards mathematics and to being able to think purposively and effectively in
mathematical situations.
This child-centred focus is consistent with the constructivist approach to
learning that has its contemporary genesis in the work of Piaget who believed that
children learn through the assimilation and accommodation of new with existing
knowledge. Learning mathematics is an active, problem solving process in which
social interaction plays an important role. In the view of Yackel, Cobb, Wood,
Wheatley, and Merkel (1990, pp. 12-13), the problems that arise when attempting to
communicate are equally valuable learning experiences as the problem tasks
themselves. Further, providing for reflection on experiences allows children time to
link new to existing knowledge, an essential process for the expansion and
refinement of current understandings (AEC, 1991, p. 17).
36
2.4
basic skills be taken, the development of appropriate skills for calculating provides
37
students with useful tools for everyday life, for the workplace, and for learning other
topics where calculative proficiency is required. The aim, therefore, is not to
develop calculative skill per se, but to provide children with skills useful for solving
problems, making applications and exploring new knowledge in mathematics and
other subject areas (Coburn, 1989, p. 47). With the ready availability of hand-held
calculators, as well as other electronic calculating devices, together with the need to
be able to flexibly adopt and improvise methods of calculation, "the thrust of
curriculum reform...is not to reduce the importance of computation but rather to
broaden the definition of computation and to elevate the importance of problem
solving" (Coburn, 1989, p. 47), in context with the development of number sense.
Paper-and-pencil procedures continue to be appropriate for situations requiring
a written record or in which the numbers are too complicated for mental calculation
but not so unwieldy as to require a calculator (Rathmell & Trafton, 1990, p. 155).
However, A National Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schools (AEC, 1991,
p. 109) presents the view that mental calculation should be the method of first
resort, particularly for less complex calculations where the numbers are easy to
work with, and where there is no need for recording partial answers. Further, mental
calculation is involved when computing with paper-and-pencil and with a calculator:
known facts need to be recalled, and estimates need to be mentally calculated as a
check on the reasonableness of the solutions obtained. Hence mental calculation is
central to the calculative process, and closely linked to paper-and-pencil and
technological calculation.
This position is encapsulated in Figure 2.1. This model of the calculative
process, while based on that in the Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School
Mathematics (NCTM, 1989, p.9) and on that devised by Rathmell and Trafton (1990,
p. 154), recognises that, for any individual, the computational process is firmly
embedded in their sense of number, computation being considered as a dimension
of number sense (Trafton, 1992, p. 9). Whatever the method of calculationmental,
paper-and-pencil, or technologicalits proficient use is likely to involve the
decomposition and recomposition of numbers, and is associated with the
characteristics of number sense delineated in Section 2.3.3 (NCTM, 1989, pp. 3940; Resnick, 1989b, p. 36; Sowder, 1992, pp. 5-6).
The need for computation most commonly arises from problem situations
(NCTM, 1989, p. 9). In such situations an individual needs to be able to (a)
38
39
Situation Requiring
Calculation
Calculative tools
available
Operation required
Confidence felt
Degree of precision
required
Emotional state
Exact Answer
PAPER-AND-PENCIL
CALCULATION
Approximate Answer
MENTAL CALCULATION
TECHNOLOGICAL
CALCULATION
Precision - Critical
Precision - Noncritical
MENTAL
COMPUTATION
COMPUTATIONAL
ESTIMATION
Exact Answer
Approximate Answer
Reasonableness of Answer
Figure 2.1.
NUMBER SENSE
40
2.5
to consider the ways in which it has been defined, but also to consider other terms
which have been used to refer to the mental calculation of exact answers.
Additionally, the links between mental computation as taught in schools and the
methods used in non-classroom settings need to be analysed. Essential to this
analysis are the characteristics of mental procedures which distinguish them from
written methods.
41
42
43
(1) Arithmetic problems which arise (a) in an oral manner, (b) in a written form,
or (c) "in the head" of the person who needs to solve the problem; (2) problems
in which pencil and paper and other mechanical devices, such as calculators,
are not used to record the intermediate steps between the statement of the
problem and its answer; (3) problems in which pencil and paper are used, and
problems in which they are not used to record the answer; and (4) problems in
which quick estimations are made which either may or may not be verified by a
written response. (pp. 352-353)
Except for point four, these criteria are ones which remain applicable to the use
of mental computation to refer to the mental calculation of exact answers, as now
used in the mathematics education literature and in this study. With concern shifting
from modes of presentation and response to the cognitive processes involved, oral
44
now has a much broader meaning than the narrow usage outlined above. This is
reflected in Cockcroft's (1982, pp. 92-93, paras 315-317) use of the expression
mental mathematics to refer to the mental and oral work that should form a major
part of the mathematics undertaken in classrooms. Its usage highlights that the
promotion of mathematical discussion is as important as a consideration of the
mental strategies employed, with both teachers and students benefiting from the
discussion of strategies that ensues (Cockcroft, 1982, p. 93, para 317)
45
often more complex than those many of the users learnt in school. Secondly,
making errors is a natural part of a process for arriving at correct arithmetic
solutions. Terezinha Carraher et al. (1987) observe that in out-of-school situations,
the results obtained by young Brazilian market sellers, "even when wrong, were
sensible because there was a continuous monitoring of the quantities during the
computation procedure; in [mental] procedures, children seem to know where they
are' at any given point" (p. 94). With respect to division strategies, Murray, Olivier,
and Human (1991, pp. 50, 55) note that most children invent powerful non-standard
algorithms, some of which are mental, in parallel with those learnt in school.
Further, children are significantly more successful when they use their own
procedures rather than the standard algorithms (Murray et al., 1991, p. 50).
In school-like settings, "people [tend] to produce, without question, algorithmic,
place-holding, school-learned techniques for solving problems, even when they
could not remember them well enough to solve problems successfully" (Lave, 1985,
p. 173). Ginsburg, Posner, and Russell (1981, p. 173) indicate that when schooled
American and Dioula children added mentally, they frequently used written
algorithmic procedures and were incorrect about twenty-five percent of the time, a
finding which may reflect the lack of emphasis given to the development of personal
procedures for computing mentally in classrooms. In Lave's (1985, p. 175) view, the
standard written algorithms taught in schools de-contextualise arithmetic, are
cumbersome and inappropriately require pencil and paper to be used most of the
time.
School mathematics should therefore be organised to provide opportunities for
children to deal with mathematics in their own environments in ways similar to those
of folk mathematicians (Maier, 1980, p. 23; Masingila et al., 1994, p. 13). In such
situations people use a variety of techniques, often mental, and invent units with
which to compute (Lave, 1985, p. 173). Gladwin (1985) suggests that:
46
This has implications for how problems are presented to children within
classrooms. Murtaugh's (1985, p. 192) analysis of how shoppers mentally solve
arithmetic problems in a supermarket suggests that, in many real-world situations
problem formation and problem solving are likely to be integral parts of a single
process. In contrast to the prepackaging of traditional school problems, with or
without a veneer of real-world characteristics, "when people are free to formulate
their own problems...the relevant inputs may be as negotiable as the eventual
solution" (Murtaugh, 1985, p. 189). In making best-buy decisions, shoppers use
qualitative features of items on the supermarket shelves to narrow the choice to two
items for which some mental arithmetic calculation is undertaken to select the item
for purchase (Murtaugh, 1985, p. 192).
As a step towards closing the gap between folk and school mathematics,
mental computation (with computational estimation and calculator usage) should
receive greater prominence in the mathematics which children undertake in
classrooms and should replace written methods as the basic computational skill of
the computer age (MSEB & NRC, 1990, p. 19). The National Research Council
(1989, p. 46) intimates that an emphasis on the development of number sense, with
which mental computation is closely entwined, should move children beyond a
narrow concern for school-certified computational algorithms.
Such algorithms have no intrinsic merit (Willis, 1992, p. 11). They were
developed to make use of the technology of paper-and-pencil and designed to be
used without the need to think about the numbers involved (Jones, 1988, p. 42;
McIntosh, 1992, p. 136). For this reason, Hope (1986a, p. 50) suggests that
standard paper-and-pencil algorithms may contribute to a fragmentary view of
numbers and number relationships and therefore not support the development of
number sense. Individuals, who are proficient with their use, work with digits and
book-keeping rules. They focus on "the written symbols, thereby losing track of both
the meaning in the transactions they are quantifying and the meaning within the
quantification system" (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 95). In contrast, meaning is
preserved during mental calculations. Hence, the major differences between mental
and written procedures arise from the degree of knowledge required of an individual
about the problem situation (Nunes, Schliemann, & Carraher, 1993, pp. 53-54). In
Skemp's (1976) terms, opportunities for the development of relational understanding
are restricted. However, with the demise of standard computational algorithms
47
opportunities arise to combine the development of number sense with the teaching
of computational procedures in useful and meaningful ways (Sowder & Schappelle,
1994, p. 344). To the degree that children continue to be required to perform paperand-pencil calculations, McIntosh (1990a, p. 37) suggests that at least one of the
following criteria should be met: (a) informal methods should be used to support and
extend the use of mental procedures, (b) their development should occur in a
problem solving context, (c) they assist in the development of number sense, and
(d) they are of intrinsic interest to children.
The calculator, in Hope's (1986a, p. 47) view, poses a greater threat to paperand-pencil procedures than do mental ones. When folk mathematicians use
calculators it is to replace the use of paper-and-pencil (Maier, 1980, p. 23). It
therefore "seems very unlikely that any children at primary school in the 1990s [sic]
will, as adults, make more than very sporadic use of [standard paper-and-pencil
methods] of calculation in a society in which calculators are commonplace"
(Curriculum Programmes Branch, Western Australia, 1989, p. 24). However, given
the propensity for individuals to take the easy way out, it is possible that calculators
could be regularly used in instances for which mental computation is more
appropriate. For this reason, Atweh (personal communication, May 13, 1992)
believes that calculators do pose a threat to mental procedures, as well as to paperand-pencil ones. It is therefore essential for students to be assisted in making
sensible choices about the planned method of calculation in particular
situationswhether to use a calculator, paper-and-pencil, or mental computation
(AAMT & CDC, 1987, p. 2).
48
and analytic. Further, they are not easily internalised and encourage cognitive
passivity (Plunkett, 1979, pp. 2-3).
Unlike written procedures which are, by definition, permanent and correctable,
mental strategies are often transitory. As Hope (1985, p. 358) reports in his analysis
of expert mental calculators, some appear incapable of explaining the processes
used. This may be due to their ability to engage in automatic processing (Shriffrin &
Schneider, 1977, cited in Jensen, 1990, p. 270) of information. Such processing is
"fast, relatively effortless, and can handle large amounts of information and perform
different operations on it simultaneously" (Jensen, 1990, p. 270). For non-expert
mental calculators, their capacity for short-term mental storage is a critical factor in
their ability to compute mentally and, by implication, in their ability to recall
procedures used. The rate of forgetting information stored in working memory is
directly proportional to the number of interpolated stages before its recall, and to the
total amount of information simultaneously being held (Hitch, 1977, p. 337). These
factors are a function of the particular procedure being employed for a mental
calculation.
Strategies for computing mentally are also characterised by their variability.
This contrasts with school-authorised paper-and-pencil procedures which are
standardised. This standardisation creates the impression that such procedures
may be easily taught and leads to the belief that their use is the correct and only
way in which calculations should be performed (Curriculum Programmes Branch,
Western Australia, 1989, p. 28), a conventional goal of school mathematics
programs. Plunkett (1979, p. 3) suggests that, for members of the public and many
non-specialist mathematics teachers, the concept of a particular operation and its
standard written algorithm are synonymous. This belief leads to the view that to
teach an operation, a method, rather than an idea, needs to be taught. It is this
assumption that confuses the issues relevant to the debate concerning the
appropriate mathematical concepts, processes and skills with which children should
become familiar.
In instances where children are permitted to use the mathematics that they
know, efficient mental procedures develop almost spontaneously (Sowder, 1990, p.
20). Such are personally meaningful and reflect the differences which exist in the
knowledge that children bring to the task (Yackel et al., 1990, p. 13). The variations
that can occur between strategies used by different children for the same task are
49
illustrated by the following finding of Cooper et al. (1992, p. 112). When calculating
the sum of 52 and 24, some Year 2 children used a counting-on procedure (count
on 24 with fingers by fives), whereas others used their knowledge of tens (50 + 20 =
70; 2 + 4 = 6). The latter strategy is based on a deeper understanding of number
than the counting strategy. Cooper et al. (1992, p. 113) report that children who
used tens in their strategies were able to progress to items beyond those which
consisted solely of basic facts or simple algorithms involving teens. These children
tended to exhibit diverse number understandings and hence were able to
manipulate numbers in sophisticated ways.
However, the knowledge, both conceptual and procedural (Hiebert & Lefevre,
1986), which an individual brings to a situation is not the only factor which governs
the nature of the strategy applied. The features of the problem context also bear on
a strategy's make-up. Mental strategies exhibit a flexibility which enables an
individual to use a particular form of a strategy, one that is matched to the nature of
the numbers involved. A general methoddistributingidentified by Hope (1987, p.
334), for calculating products involves the transformation of one or both of the
numbers to be multiplied into a series of sums or differences before calculating the
product using one of three strategies, namely, additive distribution, subtractive
distribution, and quadratic distribution. The particular strategy used is dependent
upon the numbers involved. For example, Hope (1987, p. 334) found that his
subject used additive distribution to calculate 16 x 72, namely 16 x (70 + 2) = 16 x
70 + 16 X 2 = 1120 + 32 = 1152. Whereas for 17 x 99, subtractive distribution was
used: 17 x (100 - 1) = 17 x 100 = 1700 - 17 = 1683.
In summary, the variability and flexibility of mental strategies are features that
arise naturally from the process of calculating mentally. Representative of this is
Jensen's (1990) observation of the procedures used by Shakuntala Devi, a
prodigious mental calculator. Solutions are obtained:
50
51
1979, p. 3). In Reed and Lave's (1981, p. 442) terms, and supported by Carraher et
al. (1985, p. 28), the focus is on the manipulation of symbols rather than on the
manipulation of quantities as occurs during informal (folk) mental calculations. Such
an analytic approach is "divorced from reality" (Reed & Lave, 1981, p. 442), as
efficient use of the standard paper-and-pencil algorithms requires that the digits be
dealt with separately without reference to their meaning or their relationship to realworld or representational models. This view remains valid under current
approaches to developing children's skill with the written algorithms. These
approaches are based on developing an understanding of the processes involved
through relating each step to the manipulation of base-ten materials. However, the
goal continues to be the automatic processing of written calculations.
A manipulation-of-quantities approach, which characterises mental
computation procedures, allows children to make meaningful alterations to the
problems encountered and to work with quantities that can be easily manipulated
(Carraher et al., 1987, p. 94). The approach is a holistic one (Plunkett, 1979, p. 3)
in which people use convenient groups or invent units with which to calculate (Lave,
1985, p. 173). To calculate the cost of four coconuts at Cr$35.00 each, a 12 yearold street market seller in Brazil determined that "three will be 105, plus 30, that's
135...one coconut is 35...that is...140" (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 26). The calculation
involved using the cost of a coconut as the calculative unit, and the knowledge that
30 plus 5 is 35. Such a procedure is a constructive one, as the correct answer is
progressively built-up from an early approximation. This applies particularly where a
left-to-right approach is used (Plunkett, 1979, p. 3). Such mental calculations occur
in the context of complete numbers. For example, to calculate 24 x 50, a proficient
mental calculator may simply calculate 12 x 100 (Hope, 1985, p. 362). The digits
are not considered separately as occurs with the standard written algorithm, or its
mental equivalent that non-proficient mental calculators tend to use (Hope & Sherrill,
1987, p. 108).
Related to their meaningful use of the knowledge they have of numbers and
number relationships, some children are aware of their reference to, and
manipulation of, mental pictures (McIntosh, 1990c, p. 7; Olander & Brown, 1959, p.
100; R. E. Reys, B. J. Reys, Nohda, & Emori, 1995, p. 319). Plunkett (1979, p. 3)
refers to mental strategies as often being iconic. Children have an overall picture of
52
Although mental methods can be recorded if the need arises, they are not
designed for doing so. This contrasts with written methods which Plunkett (1979)
describes "as contracted in the sense that they summarise several lines of
equations involving distributivity and associativity" (p. 2). Further, standard paperand-pencil algorithms are general, being applicable to situations involving all
numbers, large or small, whole number or decimal. Hence, there is a trade-off in
meaning and generalisability for both mental and written procedures (Nunes et al.,
1993, p. 54). Although mental algorithms preserve meaning, they are limited in their
usage, becoming grossly inefficient when dealing with large numbersfor example,
when multiplying through the chaining of successive additions, the preferred
strategy for multiplication identified by Carraher et al. (1985). Nevertheless, Plunkett
(1979, p. 3) has concluded that mental strategies are applicable to a greater range
of mathematical situations than a cursory analysis of classroom number work might
suggest.
2.6
53
54
Based on their study of the 1200 students in Years 7 to 12, Robert Reys,
Bestgen, Rybolt, and Wyatt (1982, pp. 196,198) reported that a common
characteristic of those who are proficient with computational estimation, is the
55
Prerequisite
Concepts and
Skills
Fundamental
Subskills
Estimation
Processes
Specific
Estimation
Concepts
Understand
symbol system
Compare
numbers by
size
Reformulation
Understand
place value
Compensation
Operate with
multiples and
powers of ten
Knowledge of
basic facts
Approximate
numbers are
used
The estimate is
an approximation
Appropriateness
of estimate
depends on
desired outcome
MENTAL
COMPUTATION
Translation
Figure 2.2.
56
57
58
1/3. In this situation it is likely that $103 would be rounded to $105 to simplify the
mental calculation further. This highlights that reformulation (and translation and
compensation) strategies are not simply used in isolation. Proficient computational
estimators use a combination of strategies appropriate to the context in which a
mental calculation, designed to provide an approximate answer, is to occur.
Figure 2.2 indicates that both compensation and translation also depend on an
ability to compare numbers. This view is somewhat at variance with that of
Threadgill-Sowder (1988) who does not postulate a link between translation and
number comparison. Translation entails modifying the mathematical structure of a
problem to a form which is more easily managed mentally (R. E. Reys et al., 1982,
p. 188). Threadgill-Sowder (1988, p. 191) and Sowder and Wheeler (1989, p. 135)
categorise averaging, classified as a translation strategy by Robert Reys et al.
(1982, p. 188), as reformulation. Averaging is particularly useful for addition
problems in which the numbers cluster around a common value. An approximate
answer is calculated by multiplying the common value, which can be viewed as a
reasonable group average, by the number of values in the group (R. E. Reys, 1984,
p. 554). For example, for 6,146 + 7,200 + 5,300, an approximate answer could be
calculated by selecting 6,000 as the group average and multiplying it by 3. Although
a reformulation strategycompatible roundingis used, it can be argued that the
rounding occurs in context with a desire by the estimator to change the structure of
the problem and that this influences the particular approximations used in the
calculation, a strategy dependent upon an individual's ability to compare numbers.
Translation is also dependent upon factors relevant to the process of
calculating mentally. The structure of the problem is changed to simplify the mental
computation and this is contingent upon such factors as a child's knowledge of
number relationships and confidence with various computational methods. Robert
Reys et al. (1982) suggest that the process for translation is more flexible than that
for reformulation: "The student seems to have a panoramic view of the problem and
is less constrained by the numbers involved. In fact, very often the numbers and
operations are simultaneously altered to result in more manageable forms" (p. 189).
Trafton (1986, p. 25) suggests that an essential element of insightful estimation
is the ability to sense the relationships between approximate and exact answers. In
judging an estimate's appropriateness, it may be necessary to make adjustments to
take account of any numerical variation that may have occurred through the process
59
60
61
Some methods used to arrive at more precise estimates may aid children in
their development of strategies for calculating exact answers. For example, in
calculating a closer estimate for 378 + 236 + 442, children could consider the tens
digit in each number, or the tens and ones in each, to adjust an initial estimate of
900, increasing it by 140 or 160, respectively. Addition examples such as this are
possibly ones for which primary school children may not normally be expected to
calculate exact answers mentally. Nevertheless, experiences with getting closer
strategies during computational estimation may assist children to develop flexible
approaches to calculating exact answers. Where the numbers and operations
involved are within the capability of an individual to calculate mentally, getting closer
strategies may ultimately result in turning estimates into exact answers (Irons,
1990b, p. 1).
Strategies used by those skilled in mental computation, however, go beyond
those which bear any direct relationship to those used in computational estimation
(see Figure 2.1, Tables 2.1 & 2.4). A characteristic of highly skilled mental
calculators is their ability to perceive number properties and relationships which may
be useful for calculating an exact answer (Hope, 1985, p. 358; Hunter, 1977a, p. 36;
B. J. Reys, 1986b, p. 3279-A). Numbers are decomposed and recomposed in ways
which are not necessarily based on conventional base-ten place value relationships.
For example, Hope (1987, p. 335) reports that Charlene, a highly skilled mental
calculator, calculated 87 x 23 in the following steps:
87 x 23
= (29 x 3) x 23
= 29 x (3 x 23)
= 29 x 69
= 69 x (30 - 1)
= 69 x 30 - 69
= 2070 - 69
= 2001
Such an approach requires sufficient working memory capacity to be able to coordinate and monitor many interrelated calculation activities without losing track of
the calculation (Hope, 1987, p. 335).
In summary, mental computation and computational estimation are processes
that are closely related. Each is performed mentally, taking advantage of the
structural properties and relationships among numbers. Both are used to check
62
2.7
all arithmetical problems, the range of problems for which exact answers may be
found mentally is limited (B. J. Reys, 1986a, p. 22). This situation is not merely due
to the numerical complexity of many arithmetical tasks. Of equal importance is a
consideration of an individual's understanding of, and competence with, the
essential components of mental computation.
Little research is available on which to base a comprehensive analysis of the
components of mental computation. Flournoy (1957) suggests that in situations
requiring exact answers, a person must be able to:
63
Flournoy's (1957, p. 148) first point is one that is not peculiar to mental
computation. Whatever the mathematical task, an individual needs to be able to
recognise what the problem is and be able to organise the perceived facts so that a
solution can be determined. The second requirement depends on working memory
capacity and the way in which it is used during processingin Hunter's (1978, p.
339) terms, their memory for interrupted working. The degree to which working
memory is burdened during mental calculation is largely dependent upon the
particular strategy being used, an issue that is explored in Section 2.8.3. By
arithmetical process, Flournoy (1957, p. 148) is simply referring to the particular
operationaddition, subtraction, multiplication or divisionthat has to be applied. Of
greater importance is a consideration of the particular mental strategies that are
used to carry out these operations. In any analysis of the components of mental
computation, not only should the range of strategies used be considered but also
the factors that underpin their proficient use.
In the absence of a detailed analysis of the components of mental computation
in the literature, it is considered that Sowder and Wheeler's (1989, p. 132) model for
specifying the components of computational estimation is one that can provide a
framework for discussion. Sowder and Wheeler (1989, p. 132) classify the
components into four categories: (a) Conceptual Components, (b) Related Concepts
and Skills, (c) Skill Components, and (d) Affective Components.
Conceptual components are defined as those that relate to a basic
understanding of what the process of finding an estimate entails (Sowder &
Wheeler, 1989, p. 131). For this analysis, conceptual components of mental
computation are deemed to be those that relate to an understanding of the basis of
the process for calculating exact answers mentally. Sowder and Wheeler (1989, p.
131) define related concepts and skills as those abilities that are known, or
suspected, to indirectly influence an individual's proficiency with finding approximate
solutions. With respect to computational estimation, the ability to compute mentally
is classified as a related skill (Sowder & Wheeler, 1989, p. 132). Given the
delineation of prerequisite concepts and skills relevant to mental computation in its
relationship with computational estimation (see Figure 2.2), it is considered
64
65
Table 2.1
Components of Mental Computation
1.
Affective components
2.
Conceptual components
Recognise arithmetical contexts for which mental computation is
appropriate.
Accept more than one strategy for obtaining an exact answer mentally.
Recognise that the appropriateness of a strategy depends on the context of
the calculation.
3.
66
add-up
decomposition
compensation
organisation
incorporation
place-grouping
Use factors
general factoring
half-and-double
aliquot parts
exponential factoring
iterative factoring
additive distribution
subtractive distribution
fractional distribution
quadratic distribution
Note.
67
68
useful, and (b) procedures for computing mentally should make personal sense (see
Table 2.1).
69
70
(1992, p. 5) suggests that the ability to perform mental computations using invented
strategies is a behaviour that indicates the presence of number sense. Problems
which require the invention of strategies are those more likely to be encountered
when the purpose of calculating mentally is the determination of exact answers (see
Figure 2.1). For example, one method for calculating 7 x 99 relies on the application
of the distributive law of multiplication: 7 x 99 = 7 x (100 - 1) = (7 x 100) - (7 x 1) =
700 - 7 = 693. This method also relies on a knowledge of, what Hazekamp (1986)
calls, special products"products that are easily found by multiplying by a power of
10 or a multiple of a power of 10" (pp. 117-118).
Threadgill-Sowder (1988) approached an analysis of the components of mental
computation from a somewhat different, though related, perspective to that of
Trafton. A principal component of mental computation is the ability to translate a
problem into a more mentally manageable form (Hunter, 1977a, p. 25; B. J. Reys,
1985, p. 46). Two key questions need to be asked and answered, albeit
unconsciously in many instances. These are: (a) How can the numbers be
expressed to obtain basic fact questions? and (b) How will the operational sequence
proceed as result of the way that the numbers have been expressed? (ThreadgillSowder, 1988, p. 184)
Threadgill-Sowder (1988) suggests that "because there is never just one way
to answer Question 1, that is, to choose a format for the numbers to be calculated,
mental [computation] is a very creative, inventive act" (pp. 185-186). For those who
are skilled with mental computation, it is likely that their aim is to express the
numbers in a form which can be related to elements in their store of number
knowledge and relationships that extends beyond the basic facts. Hope (1987, p.
335) reported that Charlene, an expert thirteen year-old mental calculator,
calculated 16 x 72 by reasoning 16 x (70 + 2) = (16 x 70) + (16 x 2) = 1120 + 32 =
1152. It is likely that Charlene used place value knowledge to express 72 as 70 + 2
so that she could draw on her store of products that included 16 x 70 = 1120. This
suggests that Threadgill-Sowder's (1988, p. 184) first question should be rephrased
to increase its generality, namely, How can the numbers be expressed to obtain
questions which can be answered by recall? (see Table 2.1)
"Skilled mental calculation demands that the user search for meaning' by
scanning the problem for salient number properties and relationships" (Hope,
1986a, p. 52), a view supported by Barbara Reys (1986b, p. 3279-A). Olander and
71
Brown (1959, p. 99) report a number of ways in which children calculated 51 - 34.
As suggested by Threadgill-Sowder (1988, p. 184), the operational sequence in
each case is dependent upon the way in which the numbers to be operated upon
are expressed. Included among the methods observed by Olander and Brown
(1959, p. 99), for 51 - 34, were:
34 + ?(6) = 40, 40 + ?(11) = 51; Therefore 51 - 34 = 17 (6 + 11).
34 + 10 = 44, 44 + ?(7) = 51; Therefore 51 - 34 = 17 (10 + 7).
34 + ?(1) = 35, 35 + ?(15) = 50, 50 + ?(1) = 51;
Therefore 51 - 34 = 17 (1 + 15 + 1).
50 - 30 = 20, 20 - 4 = 16; Therefore 51 - 34 = 17 (16 + 1).
51 = three 17s, 34 = two 17s; Therefore 51 - 34 = (one) 17.
During a calculation "numbers [obtained] are re-expressed in ways that lead to
basic fact [or recall] questions, and the computations carried out as a
result...present new mental calculations calling for a new cycle of questions"
(Threadgill-Sowder, 1988, p. 185). For example, in relation to the first method, 34 +
?(6) = 40 was either recalled, or calculated using basic fact knowledge (10 - 4 = 6),
and to move from 40 to 51 required question one to be reconsidered. As with the
first step, 40 + ?(11) = 51 may have merely been recalled, or it may have been
calculated using basic fact knowledge (1 - 0 = 1, 5 - 4 = 1). In each case it is
evident that the way in which the numbers and the perceived relationships between
them are expressed determines the way in which the answer is calculated.
From the above analysis, for Threadgill-Sowder's (1988) first question to be
answered successfully, children need to be able to:
72
However, in view of the rephrasing of question one, the list of related concepts
and skills (see Table 2.1) should be extended to include the ability to recall and use
a wide range of relationships between numbers. Cockcroft (1982, p. 92, para 316)
provides support for the first two components. He suggests that efficient mental
procedures are based upon an understanding of place value in association with an
ability to recall addition and multiplication facts. The ability to compose and
decompose numbers is dependent upon well-developed part-whole relationships
(Ross, 1989, p. 47) and is closely related to place value knowledge. An
"understanding of place value and ownership of its essential features is crucially
important in opening up more efficient and more simple [mental] strategies"
(McIntosh, 1991a, p. 5). Sowder (1992, p. 4) lists the ability to compose and
decompose numbers as one which demonstrates some presence of number sense.
As their number sense grows, children demonstrate increased flexibility in the way
they think about numbers. As Ross (1989) points out, ultimately "their thinking
allows them mentally to compose wholes from their component parts, decompose
whole quantities into parts, and perhaps rearrange the parts and recompose the
whole quantity, confident all the while that the quantity of the whole has not
changed" (p. 47).
Hiebert (1989, p. 82) believes that written arithmetic symbols can function in at
least two ways: (a) as records of something already known, and (b) as tools for
thought. A well developed sense of number requires that numerals, operation and
relation signs operate in both ways. This leads Sowder (1992, p. 5) to suggest that
a key behaviour indicative of the presence of number sense and critical to mental
computation (and numeration and computational estimation) is the ability to link
numeration, operation and relation symbols in meaningful ways (see Table 2.1).
Employing symbols as tools necessitates that they be treated as objects of thought.
There is evidence to suggest that proficient mental calculators use symbols in this
manner, as reflected by their physically-oriented language. They often refer to
chopping or breaking numbers apart when describing their mental techniques
(Hiebert, 1989, p. 83).
Although the use of numbers as objects of thought contributes to the
development of number sense, through advantage being taken of the properties of
the system (Hiebert, 1989, p. 83), in Trafton's (1989) view, "number sense is more
related to intuitions and insights associated with numbers as quantities, rather than
73
74
75
consideration. Four studies considered all four operations (Carraher et al., 1987;
Carroll, 1996; McIntosh, 1991a; B. J. Reys, 1986b). In some studies (Cooper et al.,
1992; Ginsburg et al., 1981; Hamann & Ashcraft, 1985) operations with basic facts
were included in the examples used. However, clear distinctions between the
strategies used for these and the strategies that may have been used to mentally
calculate with the larger numbers, should they be different, have not always been
clarified (Ginsburg et al., 1981; Hamann & Ashcraft, 1985). Consequently, the
following synthesis of available data to formulate a single system of strategies for
mentally computing with numbers greater than nine (see Tables 2.1 to 2.4), using
the work by McIntosh (1991a, 1990c) as a framework, needs to be considered
preliminary, and therefore interpreted and applied with caution.
In undertaking research to identify and classify mental strategies, McIntosh
(1990b) believes that "it is very difficult to escape the need for subjective judgments
on the part of the interviewer or the analyser of the protocols as to the interpretation
of the child's description of its mental activity" (p. 13). Such identification is all the
more difficult in instances where attempts to identify strategies are based on written
reports of past performances by expert adult mental calculators. Hope (1985, p.
358) noted that many of these reports are vague, with the writer not giving a clear
indication of the methods used by the calculator. Further, many professional mental
calculators kept the strategies they used as closely guarded secrets. Others found
difficulty in explaining their computational techniques.
The analysis of data arising from the paucity of research is confused, not only
by the subjective nature of the identified strategies, but also by the variations in
sample characteristics. The samples vary with respect to age, grade, ability, and
cultural background. Although the majority of studies centre on strategies used by
randomly selected children, some focused on those used by children categorised
according to their mental computation ability (Hope, 1985, 1987; Hope & Sherrill,
1987; McIntosh, 1991a; Olander & Brown, 1959; B. J. Reys, 1986). The latter
sampling technique is the more useful approach, particularly where the aim is to
identify efficient mental strategies, ones that could become the focus when providing
learning experiences to develop children's mental computation abilities. The age of
subjects ranged from approximately six years for children in Grade 1 (Hamann &
Ashcraft, 1985) to adulthood (Hitch, 1977, 1978; Hope, 1985). Some studies
investigated strategies used by children in various year-levels (Cooper et al., 1996,
76
Grades 2-4 longitudinally; Hope & Sherrill, 1987, Grades 11-12; Hamann & Ashcraft,
1985, Grades 1, 4, 7 & 10; McIntosh, 1991a, Grades 2-7; Olander & Brown, 1959,
Grades 6-12).
A further variable to be taken into consideration when analysing the research is
the size of the numbers contained in the numerical situations. The majority of
studies focused on operations with one- and two-digit numbers. Those that involved
three-digit numbers and beyond are generally ones in which senior students or
adults formed part or all of the samples (Ginsburg et al., 1981; Hitch, 1977, 1978;
Hope, 1985; Hope & Sherrill, 1987; Olander & Brown, 1959; Petitto & Ginsburg,
1982). Exceptions to this are Hope's (1987) study of a 13 year-old skilled mental
calculator and that of Carraher et al. (1987), which investigated the strategies used
by third-grade Brazilian children, whose ages ranged from eight to thirteen years.
Few studies have included examples employing common fractions, decimal
fractions or percentages (R. E. Reys et al., 1995).
Contexts used in the studies include informal out-of-school settings and formal
school situations in which the operations are most commonly context-free. In some
studies, the numbers to be operated upon were embedded in word problems in an
endeavour to add a life-like quality to the operations (Carraher et al., 1987; Cooper
et al., 1992; Vakali, 1985). Context-free examples may be presented in a horizontal
or vertical format, thus providing an additional variable that may influence the use of
a particular mental strategy. Operations presented vertically increase the likelihood
of paper-and-pencil procedures being used to calculate mentally (Cooper et al.,
1992, p. 105). Terezinha Carraher et al. (1987, p. 89) reported that children were
more likely to use mental approaches when solving simulated store situations and
word problems, with context-free computational exercises being more likely solved
by written procedures.
77
involving the four operations, classifies strategies into clusters dependent upon such
factors as whether an understanding of place value is evident, or whether it was
simply a matter of using known facts. Other classifications have been based, not
only on the particular strategies used, but also on the observed general
predispositions towards mental computation (Cooper et al., 1992). The results from
a longitudinal study, initially with Grade 2 children's approaches to addition and
subtraction, by Cooper et al. (1992), suggest that general predispositions may be
considered on two continua, namely, (a) the propensity to visualise numbers, and
(b) the way in which children perceive number situations. Although some children
do not appear to have the ability to visualise numbers, others demonstrate "a strong
ability..., particularly with arrays, and to use this visualisation in their counting"
(Cooper et al., 1992, p. 114). The strategies used are hypothesised to be directed
by three different approaches to thinking: (a) a feel for number, (b) a feel for
strategy, and (c) a feel for process.
Feel for number is characterised by verbal reports such as "eight is two less
than ten" and reflects a tendency to compose and decompose the numbers to make
the operation more manageablea related concept and skill discussed above (see
Table 2.1). Cooper et al., (1992) reported that "children with feel for strategy tend to
be fixated on their strategy and attempt to apply it seemingly without regard for
efficiency" (p. 115). Such children often rely on counting-on and counting-back by
twos, fives and tens. These two approaches are not necessarily used in isolation.
Each may be used with the other, or in association with the approach that reveals a
more global conception of their taskfeel for process (Cooper et al., 1992, p. 115).
The researchers reported that the children who consistently use a feel for process
approach are demonstrating the most marked growth in their ability to compute
exact answers mentally. Such an approach indicates a more acute sense of
number and operation, as reflected by such comments as: "I want the number to go
up" and "Adding makes things bigger" (Cooper et al., 1992, p. 115).
In subsequent research, Cooper, Heirdsfield, and Irons (1995, p. 9) considered
the approach to operation and the method of calculation, together with a subject's
attitude to numbers and approach to process, in determining the category into which
a child's strategy would be classified. In categorising a child's approach to an
operation, such factors as the method of subtractiontake-away, missingaddendwere considered. Consideration was also given to the method of
78
79
reach the answer" (Svenson & Sjoberg, 1982, p. 91). The complexity of the
manipulations increases proportionally to the complexity of the numerical situation
(Vakali, 1985, p. 112). An increase in complexity may be due to a change in size of
the numbers involved, a factor that influences the implementation of particular
mental strategies (R. Cooper, 1984, cited in Murray & Olivier, 1989, p. 4). With
increased number size, complexity may be added by the need to carry and borrow
during addition and subtraction, respectively, procedures that are avoided by more
proficient mental calculators (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 108).
As discussed previously, Trafton (cited in B. J. Reys, 1989, p. 72) proposes
two levels of mental computation. The first level incorporates problems that
primarily require routine operations with powers of ten and multiples of powers of
ten. In contrast, the reconstructive strategies, which typify the second level, depend
on a person being able to use self-developed techniques that are dependent upon a
knowledge of the properties of numbers and operations (B. J. Reys, 1989, p. 72).
Such strategies require adaptive expertise, rather than routine expertise (Hatano,
1988, cited in Sowder, 1992, p. 19). Adaptive expertise necessitates an
understanding of how and why particular strategies work and how they can be
modified to suit the characteristics of particular numerical situations.
A key aspect of an individual's conceptual knowledge relevant to mental
computation is an understanding of place value concepts (see Table 2.1). Murray
and Olivier (1989, pp. 5-7) propose a model describing four increasingly abstract
levels of computational strategies with two-digit numbers. The type of strategy at
each level is linked to prerequisite number and numeration knowledge. It is
suggested that the distinction between pre-numerical (count-all) and numerical
(counting-on, bridging-the-ten) strategies evident in basic fact calculations remains
for two-digit numbers (Murray & Olivier, 1989, p. 5). A further distinction, which may
also apply to larger numbers, can be made between the numerical strategies based
on counting and the heuristic strategies that do not entail countinga distinction
originally proposed by Carpenter (1980, p. 317) with respect to the acquisition of
addition and subtraction concepts.
Heuristic strategies are ones that "often involve the decomposition of one or
more of the numbers in a problem in order to transform the given problem to an
easier problem or series of problems" (Murray & Olivier, 1989, p. 5). Carraher et al.
(1987) refer to the two types of mental strategies identified in their
80
81
that few primary grade children, in the United States of America, decompose and
recompose counting numbers based on knowledge of their decimal structure.
The conceptualisation of ten as an iterable unit typifies Level 4 understanding,
as defined by Murray and Olivier (1989, pp. 6-7). Children are able to conceive of
two-digit numbers as consisting of groups of tens and some ones. Murray and
Olivier (1989, p. 6) point out that, at Level 3, children work with tens as numbers, but
at Level 4 work with ten as an iterable unit. Hence, Level 3 children view 67, for
example, as 60 and a 7 and not as 6 tens and 7 ones. Although McIntosh (1990b)
considers that "the distinction, though defended by the authors, is not entirely clear
for mental computation" (p. 17), Level 4 understanding, in Murray and Olivier's
(1989) view, allows for "a progressive schematization (shortening') and abstraction
of the Level 3 heuristic strategies" (p. 7). To illustrate this distinction, a Level 3
solution to 36 + 27 is: "Take the six and the seven away, thirty plus twenty is fifty;
now add six, then add seven. This compares to a Level 4 strategy: "Thirty plus two
tens, that's fifty. Six plus seven is thirteen, that's sixty-three" (Murray & Olivier,
1989, pp. 6-7).
Terezinha Carraher et al. (1987) have suggested that mental computation "can
no longer be treated merely as idiosyncratic procedures nor inconsequential
curiosities. It involves sophisticated heuristics that are general, revealing a
substantial amount of knowledge about the decimal system and skill in arithmetic
problem solving" (p. 96). Additionally, they should not be dismissed as inferior and
irrelevant to formal learning. Teachers should become aware of the strategies
children use and capitalise on these to enhance the development of children's
mathematical abilities.
As indicated previously, it is the reconstructive memory processes (Svenson &
Sjoberg, 1982, p. 91) that are of primary concern in the formulation of the strategy
components of mental computation. If teachers are to take advantage of the
approaches used by children and adults to compute mentally, they need to be aware
of the pre-numerical, numerical and, most importantly, the heuristic strategies
(Carraher et al., 1987, p. 91) that have been identified as being in common use.
This awareness needs to be accompanied by a realisation that mental strategies
tend to be adapted to the specific characteristics of the numerical situations,
particularly in out-of-school settings (Carraher et al., 1985, p. 95; Murtaugh, 1985, p.
192).
82
83
This somewhat different view of decimal structure, as represented by a ninetynine board, can be applied to mental addition and subtraction. For example, 72 - 47
can be calculated by moving down the 10 string from 72 four positions to 32 and
then by moving down the ones string seven positions to 32 (Resnick, 1983, p. 133).
This view is supported by Beishuizen (1993, p. 316) who found, particularly for
Grade 2 children classified as demonstrating a lower-level ability, that the use of a
hundredsquare had relatively positive effects on developing proficiency with addition
and subtraction using an N10 strategya strategy in which the first number is kept
whole while the second is decomposed.
Although not included in Hamann and Ashcraft's (1985, p. 66) list of
preparation strategies, the strategies categorised by McIntosh (1990c, p. 2) as initial
strategies reflect ways in which complex number situations can be approached.
These are classified as: (a) change subtraction to addition and division to
multiplication, and (b) use the commutative laws of addition and multiplication. With
respect to the latter, Barbara Reys (1986b, p. 3279-A) categorises the use of the
commutative (and associative) properties of addition and multiplication as
translation strategies. Translation is identified as one of the three most common
approaches used by high and middle ability mental computers in Grades 7 and 8.
To facilitate a comprehensive summary of the categories of strategies identified
as being used to calculate exact answers mentally, a more detailed analysis is
presented in the sections which follow. This analysis is organised under the
following headings: (a) Counting Strategies, (b) Strategies Based Upon Instrumental
Understanding, and (c) Heuristic Strategies Based Upon Relational Understanding.
Counting Strategies
McIntosh (1990c, pp. 2-3, 1991a, p. 2) distinguished between counting
forwards or backwards in oneselementary countingand counting in both directions
using larger unitscounting in larger units (see Table 2.2). With respect to countingon in ones, Resnick and Omanson (1987, p. 66), following the work of Resnick
(1983), hypothesised four counting procedures for adding a one-digit number to a
two-digit number: min of the addends, sum of the units, min of the units, and mental
carry. These strategies have their origins with the work by Groen and Parkman
(1972) who investigated addition methods involving two addends less than ten.
84
Chronometric models, such as these, "[assume] a counter in the head' that [can] be
set initially at any number, then incremented a given number of times and finally
read out'" (Resnick, 1983, p. 117). Different strategies necessitate a different
number of increments. Hence, the time taken to provide an answerreaction
timeis the measure by which assumptions are made with respect to particular
strategies used.
From Resnick and Omanson's (1987) study, chronometric evidence supported
by interview data, provides an indication for the use of each of the strategies, except
sum of the units. The min of the addends strategy requires no place value
knowledge as the single-digit number is added-on in increments of one after the
mental counter is set to the two-digit numberfor 23 + 9, the mental counter is set to
23, and the child counts 24, 25, 26...32. It follows from this example that an ability
to count across the decade barrier is a prerequisite.
To be able to use the min of the units strategy, a child needs to have acquired
some ability with partitioning and recombining numbers (see Table 2.1), a Level 3
numeration skill, as proposed by Murray and Olivier (1989, p. 6). Resnick and
Omanson (1987, p. 66) described this strategy as decomposing the two-digit
number into a tens component and a ones component and then recombining the
tens component with whichever of the two unit quantities is larger. The mental
counter is then set to the reconstituted number and the smaller of the units digits is
added in increments of one. For 23 + 9, the operation is recomposed to 29 + 3, with
the mental counter set to 29 and then incremented three times to 32.
Mental carry is a strategy that mimics the carrying procedure for the written
algorithm. For addition, "mentally add the units digits, mentally carry a 1 if
85
Table 2.2
Counting Strategies
Elementary counting
counting-on in ones
min of the addends
23 + 9: 24, 25, 26...32; 32
min of the units
23 + 9: 29 + 3; 30, 31, 32; 32
counting-back in ones
24 - 6: 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18
Note.
counting-on in twos/fives/tens
80 + 60: 90, 100...140; 140
71 - 44: 54, 64, 74; minus 3; 27
counting-back in twos/fives/tens
28 - 15: 23, 18, 13; 13
repeated addition
15 x 50: 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 = 250; 2 x 250 = 500;
500 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 50 = 750
repeated subtraction
150 30: 150 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 - 30 = 0; 5
Adapted from: McIntosh (1990c, 1991a) and Resnick & Omanson (1987)
necessary, then mentally add the tens digit to the carry digit" (Resnick & Omanson,
1987, p. 67). The use of a mental form of a written algorithm is a strategy
categorised by McIntosh (1990c, 1991a) as one relying on the instrumental use of
place value (see next section).
In a cross-cultural study by Ginsburg et al. (1981, p. 173) it is reported that, for
both schooled and unschooled young American and Dioula children, counting was
frequently observed for addition examples involving relatively small sums12 + 7, for
example. However, no indication of the particular counting strategies used was
provided. Olander and Brown (1959, p. 99) observed that counting is a slow
86
procedure, with many low achievers forgetting what has been counted before the
process is completed, an indication of their limited capacity for interrupted working
(Hunter, 1978).
Although decrementingcounting-back from the larger numberand
incrementingcounting-onmodels for subtraction have been proposed for basic
addition and subtraction facts (Resnick, 1983, p. 119), few studies have investigated
these models for operating beyond the basic facts. Counting-on for subtraction
involves starting with the smaller number and counting on to the larger, usually by
ones, twos, fives or tens (Cooper et al., 1992, p. 108; McIntosh, 1991a, p. 2;
Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 99). Except for the first approach, McIntosh (1990c, p. 1;
1991a, p. 2) classifies these strategies as Counting in larger units (see Table 2.2).
Olander and Brown (1959) related a count-on by tens approach for subtraction: "71 44: 54, 64, 74, minus 3, the answer is 27 because there are 3 tens minus 3" (p. 99),
an approach that relies on a knowledge of basic subtraction facts, and an ability to
compensate. Cooper et al. (1992, p. 108) reported a count-on strategy for the
addition of two-digit numbers based on a knowledge of doubles. To add 23c and
12c, a child twice adds six to 23: 23 + 6 + 6.
Other strategies classified by McIntosh (1990c, p. 1) as counting in larger units
are: counted back in twos/tens, counted back to second number in two/tens,
repeated addition, repeated subtraction, multiples, and recited tables. To the first of
these can be added counting back in fives, for examples such as 28 - 15 (Cooper et
al., 1992, p. 111). Whereas counting back by twos/fives/tens entails decrementing
the larger number by a number of steps whose value is the smaller number,
counting back to the second number requires that the value of the number of steps
equals the difference between the two numbersfor 140 - 60, a child explained:
"You have 140 and you counted backwards in 10s" (McIntosh, 1990c, p. 3).
Some children have been observed to multiply using repeated addition. One of
the strategies, classified by Carraher et al. (1987) as a repeated-grouping heuristic,
involves repeatedly adding fifty to find 15 x 50: "[Jos] started by adding chunks of
50 five times to 250. He doubled this chunk, getting ten 50s, and then went back to
adding individual 50s" (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 93). This procedure, as Carraher et
al. (1985) point out, is one that "becomes grossly inefficient when large numbers are
involved" (p. 28).
87
88
Table 2.3
Strategies Based Upon Instrumental Understanding
Used place value instrumentally
removed zero
90 - 70: 9 - 7 = 2; add a zero; 20
Note.
stacking
8 x 999: 8 x 9 = 72, 72(0), 72(00)
Adapted from: Hope & Sherrill (1987) and McIntosh (1990c, 1991a)
the relative value of the symbols" (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 90). With respect to the
removed zero strategy, McIntosh (1990c) records the following dialogue between
child and interviewer, and asserts that teaching mental computation through a focus
on rules is as self-defeating as such an approach is for written computation
(McIntosh, 1991a, p. 6; 1996, p. 273):
Child:
Interviewer:
Right and how is it you are able to take these zeros on and off?
Child:
Interviewer:
How did you find out how to do that. Do you remember when,
how you know...
Child:
89
Interviewer:
Child:
Don't know.
(McIntosh, 1990c, p. 4)
Ginsburg et al. (1981, pp. 173-174) have observed that as schooled American
and Dioula children grow older, they tend to abandon counting strategies in favour
of the standard paper-and-pencil algorithms applied mentally. These were found to
be used approximately 75% of the time for addition by children categorised as
middle, with respect to age. A number of researchers have observed the mental
application of the standard written algorithms for addition, subtraction and
multiplication to operations beyond the basic facts (Cooper et al., 1992; Ginsburg et
al., 1981; Hope & Sherrill, 1987; Markovits & Sowder, 1994; McIntosh, 1990c,
1991a; B. J. Reys, 1985; Vakali, 1985). In other studies (Hamann & Ashcraft, 1985;
Hitch, 1977, 1978; Resnick & Omanson, 1987), although the classifications have not
been explicitly linked to the written algorithms, some of the strategies identified can
be interpreted as being analogous to the standard procedures. One of the
preparation strategies identified by Hamann and Ashcraft (1985) was classified as
one's column, where an approach to solving 14 + 12 was recorded as "two plus four
equals six and one plus one is two" (p. 67).
It is where regroupingborrowing or carryingis required that it becomes most
apparent that children are following the written algorithm, operating, in Ginsburg's et
al. (1981, p. 171) terms, on the numbers as digits and not as tens or hundreds. One
child explained their procedure for adding 39 and 25 as: "9 plus 5 is 14, carry the 1,
1 plus 3 is 4, plus 2 is 6,...64" (Vakali, 1985, p. 111). Vakali (1985, p. 111) observed
that this ones-tens-organise strategy is the most frequently used approach for
mental addition and subtraction by Year 3 children. In comparing the performances
of children in Years 2 to 7, McIntosh (1991a, p. 5) indicated that many errors were
made by children who used a mental form of the written addition and subtraction
algorithms, particularly those classified as the least competent with mental
computation.
Similar results are reported by Markovits and Sowder (1994), and Hope and
Sherrill (1987), with respect to multiplication. Students in Grades 11 and 12,
unskilled with mental multiplication, preferred to use an analogue of the written
algorithm, "[making] little attempt to examine the calculative task for even the most
90
transparent number properties that might aid in the calculation" (Hope & Sherrill,
1987, p. 104). Although heuristic strategies, reliant on a recognition of such
properties, provide strong evidence for an understanding of the composition and
partition principles, Resnick and Omanson (1987, p. 70) caution that the tendency to
use school-taught algorithms may mask such an understanding.
Four principal variations of the standard written algorithm for multiplication
have been identified by Hope and Sherrill (1987, p. 101-105): no partial product
retrieved, one partial product retrieved, two partial products retrieved and stacking
(see Table 2.3). When using the first strategy, Grade 11 and 12 students "made no
attempt to adapt paper-and-pencil methods to a mental medium. Each partial
product was calculated digit by digit, and no numerical equivalent larger than a basic
fact was retrieved during the calculation" (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 101). This
strategy, together with the second, was often guided by gestures that reflected a
desire to write each stage of the calculation (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 105).
Markovits and Sowder (1994, p. 23) found that, following the implementation of
instructional units on mental strategies, Grade 7 students tended to remain with
standard paper-and-pencil algorithms in situations where they could easily be
applied mentally, but looked for nonstandard methods where these could not so
easily be used.
By retrieving one or two of the partial products from long-term memory, the
demands on working memory are reduced. However, Hope and Sherrill (1987, p.
105) observed difficulties with the organisation stage of the procedure not dissimilar
to those observed by Vakali (1987, p. 112) for subtraction. As defined by Vakali
(1985, p. 112), this stage involves combining partial answers into a final solution.
Hope and Sherrill (1987) record that, following determining the partial products of
500 and 2500 for 12 x 250, one student said: "5, 0, 0, and 2, 5, 0, 0,...would be...0,
5, 7, 2...2, 7, 5, 0?" (p. 105), a right-to-left additive process.
The organise stage, when using the stacking strategy relies on visualising the
partial products as they would appear if they had been recorded in writing. This
strategy was applied only in operations that involved multiplying a multiple-digit
number by a single-digit number. For example, 8 x 999 was calculated by thinking:
"8 times 72, 72, and 72, right across" (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 102). Where skilled
students used the paper-and-pencil analogue, they tended to retrieve larger
91
92
1983; Sowder, 1992; Trafton, 1978; Vakali, 1985), those strategies that rely primarily
upon place value knowledge can reasonably be placed into one of the McIntosh's
(1990c, 1991a) categories without the need to use bridged tens/hundreds. Hence
this strategy cluster is not included in the following analysis of heuristic strategies for
calculating beyond the basic facts (see Tables 2.1 & 2.4).
Strategies categorised as added/subtracted parts of second number are
described by Vakali (1985), for the addition of two-digit numbers, as entailing:
The addition of the two-digit first addend to the tens of the second
addend, then addition of this sum to the ones of the second addend....For
46 + 38, "46 plus 30 is 76, 76 plus 8 is 84. (p. 111)
Beishuizen (1985, p. 252; 1993, p. 295) and Wolters, Beishuizen, Broers, and
Knoppert (1990, p. 22) refer to this approach as the N-10 procedure, whereas
Cooper et al. (1992, p. 108) classify it as a used tens strategy. Cooper et al. (1996,
p. 149) and Heirdsfield (1996, p. 133) refer to this approach as left to right
aggregation. A variation of this strategy is also reported by Cooper et al. (1992, p.
111). Rather than add the value of the tens digit first, the ones digit is used
initiallyfor example, for 36 + 29; 36 + 9 = 45, 45 + 20 = 65. This is referred to by
Beishuizen (1993, p. 295) as the u-N10 strategy, one which Cooper et al. (1996, p.
150) and Heirdsfield (1996, p. 133) term right to left aggregation.
Though it appears customary to decompose the second addend, Flournoy
(1959, p. 138) reported that, after a series of mental computation lessons, the
majority of children were using two approaches to solving 34 + 48, one of which
involved decomposing the first addend (34): 30 + 48 = 78, 78 + 4 = 82. To allow
93
Table 2.4
Heuristic Strategies Based Upon Relational Understanding
Add or subtract parts of the first or second number
34 + 48:
30 + 48 = 78, 78 + 4 = 82
46 + 38:
46 + 30 = 76, 76 + 8 = 84
33 - 16:
33 - 10 = 23, 23 - 6 = 17
Use fives, tens and/or hundreds
add-up
317 - 198:
51 - 34:
decomposition
200 - 35: 200 = 100 + 100, 35 = 30 + 5, 100 - 30 = 70, 70 - 5 = 65, 165
252 - 57: 252 - 52 = 200, 200 - 5 = 195
compensation
28 + 29: 30 + 30 = 60, 60 - 2 - 1 = 57
25 + 89: 89 + 11 = 100, 25 - 11 = 14, 100 + 14 = 114
86 - 38: 88 - 40 = 48
organisation
58 + 34: 50 + 30 = 80, 8 + 4 = 12, 80 + 12 = 92
36 - 23: 30 - 20 = 10, 6 - 3 = 3, 10 + 3 = 13
incorporation
39 + 25: 30 + 20 = 50, 50 + 9 = 59, 59 + 5 = 64
51 - 34: 50 - 30 = 20, 20 - 4 = 16, 16 + 1 = 17
43 - 26: 40 - 20 = 20, 20 + 3 = 23, 23 - 6 = 17
place-grouping
439 - 327: 39 - 27 = 12, 4(00) - 3(00) = 1(00), 112
94
Use factors
general factoring
60 x 15:
60 x 3 x 5 = 300 x 3 = 900
half-and-double
60 x 15:
30 x 30 = 900
aliquot parts
25 x 48:
48 x (100 4) = (48 4) x 100 = 12 x 100 = 1200
exponential factoring
32 x 32:
(25)2 = 210 = 1024
iterative factoring
27 x 32:
27 x 25; 27, 54, 108, 216, 432, 864
Note.
additive distribution
64 4:
(60 4) + (4 4) = 15 + 1 = 16
21 x 13:
(20 x 13) + (1 x 13) = 260 + 13 = 273
subtractive distribution
8 x 999:
8 x (1000 - 1) = (8 x 1000) - (8 x 1) = 8000 - 8 = 7992
fractional distribution
15 x 48:
(10 + 5) x 48 = 10 x 48 = 480, of 480 = 240, 480 + 240 = 720
quadratic distribution
49 x 51:
50 - 1 = 2500 - 1 = 2499
Adapted from: Carraher et al. (1987); Flournoy (1959); Hope (1987, 1985);
McIntosh (1991a, 1990c); Olander & Brown (1959)
for this variation this cluster is referred to as: added or subtracted parts of the first or
second number (see Tables 2.1 & 2.4).
When this approach is used for subtracting two-digit numbers a strategy
analogous to that described above for addition is used:
95
96
Another such approach, similar to that for counting change, involves arriving at
a multiple of five at the first step, rather than ten as described above: For "51 34....34 plus 1, 35; 35 plus 15, 50; 1, 51; 17'" (Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 99). It is
suggested by Olander and Brown (1959, p. 99) that the advantage of these
approaches is that the subtrahend can be forgotten following the initial step,
although they require partial answers to be retained in working memory. A further
advantage is that the need to borrow or regroup is eliminated, thus reducing the
complexity of an operation.
Strategies that involve decomposing the minuend and/or the subtrahend, so
that multiples of fives, tens or hundreds may be used to simplify the calculation, are
classified by Carraher et al. (1987, p. 91) as decomposition heuristics (see Tables
2.1 & 2.4). To solve 200 - 35, presented as a word problem, the following
explanation was provided:
If it were thirty, then the result would be seventy. But it's sixty-five; one
hundred sixty-five. (The 35 was decomposed into 30 and 5, a procedure
that allows the child to operate initially with only hundreds and tens; the
units were taken into account afterward. The 200 was likewise
decomposed into 100 and 100; one 100 was stored while the other was
used in the computation procedure.) (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 91)
Carraher et al. (1987, p. 92) point out that this approach for subtraction
replaces the digits in one or more places with zero. The use of tens and hundreds
is sought because round numbers, numbers that end in zero, are more likely to be
related to known number facts100 - 30 - 5, for example. Further, this procedure
reduces the demands on short-term memory as the need to operate on hundreds,
tens and units simultaneously is avoided. Where numbers without any zeros are
involved, the search for round numbers becomes particularly apparent in some
instances. To subtract 57 from 252 a child explained:
Take away fifty-two, that's two hundred, and five to take away, that's one
hundred and ninety-five. (The children decomposed 252 into 200 and 52;
57 was decomposed into 52 + 5; removing both 52s, there remained
another five to take away from 200.) (Carraher et al., 1987, p. 92)
97
Interviewer:
What's 25 add 89
Child:
Interviewer:
Child:
98
Interviewer:
58 + 34
Child:
Beishuizen (1985, pp. 253, 256) and Wolters et al. (1990, p. 28) indicate that
this strategythe 10-10 procedureproduces more errors than the added/subtracted
parts of second number (N-10) strategy discussed previously, a finding supported by
Heirdsfield (1996, p. 133). In using the N-10 procedure fewer decisions have to be
made as only one of the numbers is decomposed, thus resulting in fewer calculative
steps. Arising out of an analysis of approaches to teaching addition in Grade 2
using concrete materials and children's spontaneous methods for addition and
subtraction, Beishuizen (1985, p. 256) suggests that the added or subtracted parts
of second number approach may be viewed as a more learned and algorithmic
procedure than working from the left which is a more invented and heuristic
procedure. However, the error rate for the latter strategy may be due, at least for
Queensland children, to its being infrequently practised in classrooms (Heirdsfield,
1996, p. 133).
Hope (1985, p. 359) indicates that there is some evidence to suggest that a
left-to-right approach is less demanding on short-term memory than one that
involves working from the right. The memory load, using a working from the left
approach, can be reduced by progressively incorporating each interim calculation
into a single result, a characteristic of an efficient mental strategy (Hope & Sherrill,
1987, p. 108). For example, "for 39 + 25, 30 plus 20 is 50, 50 + 9 is 59, 59 plus 5 is
64'" (Vakali, 1985, p. 99). This approach, designated the 10-10-N procedure by
Beishuizen (1985), regrouping by Ginsburg (1982, p. 196), group by tens and ones:
cumulating sums by R. E. Reys et al. (1995), and incorporation in this analysis, does
not require an organisation stage (see Table 2.4) in which two sums are added to
form the answer as the final step of the calculation (Vakali, 1985, p. 111).
99
With respect to subtraction, difficulties arise when the need to regroup occurs
when using an approach analogous to that of McIntosh's (1990c, p. 57) example for
addition outlined previously, which relies on subtracting the hundreds/tens then the
ones. To overcome this need, an approach similar to the incorporation procedure
for addition may be used (see Tables 2.1 & 2.4). Two variations of this method,
referred to by Olander and Brown (1959, p. 99) as compensatory rounding, have
been observed. The difference between the strategies pertains to the order in which
the ones digits are brought into the calculation. The following examples
characterise these approaches:
For 51 - 34, "50 minus 30, 20; minus 4, 16; plus 1, 17" (Olander &
Brown, 1959, p. 99)
Well I took the 4 and the 8 and added them together which went
to 12, and then I took the 5 and the 3 which equalled 80 and
added on the 12, which equalled 92. (p. 6)
100
which allows a child to use ten as an iterable unit. It can be assumed that this child
understands, implicitly at least, that 5 tens were added to 3 tens to give 8 tens (80).
A strategy, which relies on an in-depth understanding of numeration to
decompose the numbers so that the calculation is simplified, is referred to by
Olander and Brown (1959, p. 99) as a place-grouping approach (see Tables 2.1 &
2.4). This approach is reflective of Jensen's (1990) observations of the methods
used by Shakuntala Devi. Devi explained that when given a large number it
"automatically falls apart' in its own way, and the correct answer simply falls out'.
Each number uniquely dictates its own solution" (Jensen, 1990, p. 262). Five high
achievers are reported by Olander and Brown (1959) as having used a placegrouping approach:
For example, in 439 - 327, when a pupil thought "39 minus 27, 12; 4
minus 3, 1; 112," he broke up the 439 into 400 and 39, and 327 into 300
and 27. (p. 99)
A complex variation of this strategy, which involves compensating for not regrouping
during the initial subtraction, is also presented by Olander and Brown (1959): "6000
- 2249...."100 minus 49, 51; 60 minus 22, 38; minus 1, 37; 3751" (p. 99).
In proposing a classification system for mental computation strategies,
McIntosh (1990c, p. 1) distinguishes between strategies based upon the relational
use of place value concepts and the use of other relational knowledge. Such a
distinction, however, is not always clear-cut and may be considered somewhat
artificial, given that place value knowledge is simply one aspect of an individual's
conceptual knowledge. Mental computation strategies that rely on mathematical
concepts and principles other than those related to place value, or on numerical
equivalents beyond the basic facts, are likely to be ones used by those who
demonstrate greater computational skill. With respect to the mental multiplication
strategies used by skilled mental calculators identified by Hope and Sherrill (1987),
McIntosh (1990b) remarked that "many of the students in this study were clearly at a
more advanced level than those considered elsewhere in this paper" (p. 19), an
observation relevant to the strategies hitherto discussed in this analysis of heuristic
strategies.
101
When using relational knowledge, other than that primarily based on place
value, to calculate exact answers mentally, three categories are evident in the
research literature. These are: (a) a number-relations approach (Olander & Brown,
1959, p. 99), and strategies based on (b) factoring and (c) distribution (Hope, 1985,
pp. 358-366; Hope, 1987 p. 334; Hope & Sherrill, 1987, pp. 102-103). Although a
number-relations approach is one appropriate for all four operations, factoring and
distribution are ones more suited to multiplication and division. Based on an
analysis of reports of strategies used by expert mental calculators, Hope (1985, pp.
358, 362) concludes that factoring is their favourite method of calculating, with
multiplication their favourite operation.
A number-relations approach relies on relating a calculation to another to
which the answer is known (see Table 2.4)that is, to use known facts (French,
1987, p. 39; McIntosh, 1991a, p. 2; Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 99). For example, to
subtract 14 from 29, one method is to relate the operation to known multiplication
facts: "two 14s plus 1, 29; one 14 plus 1, 15" (Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 99).
The categories for classifying mental strategies are not mutually exclusive and
the classification of particular strategies can only be achieved with any certainty if
based on verbal reports. Of relevance to relating a calculation to a known fact,
French (1987, p. 39) has suggested that many mental methods depend on relating a
particular calculation to a simpler one. For example, to work out 80 x 7, it can be
related to 10 x 7. In effect, the calculation becomes 10 x 7 x 8 and hence could also
be classified as a factoring approach. Factoring involves transforming one or more
factors into a series of products or quotients (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 102). Hope
(1985, pp. 362-266; 1987, p. 334) and Hope and Sherrill (1987, pp. 102-103) have
identified five categories of factoring strategies into which strategies identified by
other researchers (Carraher et al., 1987; Flournoy, 1954; B. J. Reys, 1985) are able
to be placed. The five categories of mental strategies that involve factoring are:
general factoring, half-and-double, aliquot parts, exponential factoring and iterative
factoring (see Tables 2.1 & 2.4).
General factoring involves factoring "one or more of the factors before applying
the associative law for multiplication" (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 103). Flournoy
(1954) recounts one method used by an intermediate grade student to calculate 11
x 16: "Half of 16 is 8; 11 x 8 = 88. I doubled the 88 to get my answer of 176" (p.
149). Barbara Reys (1985), cited in a draft of B. J. Reys and Barger (1994),
102
describes a similar process for finding the product of 60 x 15: "It's the same as 60 x
3 x 5 or 300 x 3 or 900. In some instances, other strategies may be used to
calculate intermediate steps. For example, Hope and Sherrill (1987, p. 103) noted
that for 25 x 48 one senior high school student calculated "5 times 48 is 240, and 5
times 240 is 1200"; 25 had been factored into 5 x 5 and additive distribution applied
to ascertain the intermediate calculations, 5 x 48 and 5 x 240: 5 x 48 = (5 x 40) + (5
x 8 ) and 5 x 240 = (5 x 200) + 5 x 40).
This approach was classified by Hope and Sherrill (1987) "as general factoring
rather than distribution because the computation was transformed initially into a
series of products rather than sums" (p. 103). A strategy for solving 100 4,
considered by Carraher et al. (1987) to be a repeated-grouping heuristic, can also
be classified as a general factoring strategy. A child explained that:
103
applied...to those computations where one factor (f) [is] a factor of a power of 10 (p)
and the remaining factor [is] a multiple of the quotient p/f " (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p.
103). Hope (1987) reports that Charlene, an expert 13 year-old mental calculator,
multiplied 25 and 48 by reasoning "48 x 100/4 = 48/4 x 100 = 12 x 100 = 1200" (p.
334). This approach is particularly useful in instances where one of the factors is
25, 50 or 125, as the reference numbers are 100 (25 x 4), 100 (50 x 2) and 1000
(125 x 8), respectively (Hope, 1985, p. 364)a useful method to simplify mental
calculations.
Strategies that rely on a knowledge of exponential arithmetic have been
identified by Hope and Sherrill (1987, p. 103), and Hope (1985, pp. 365-368),
namely, exponential factoring and iterative factoring, respectively (see Tables 2.1 &
2.4). Although these approaches are similar, Hope and Sherrill (1987) define
exponential factoring as a strategy that relies on the application of an exponential
rule. For example, to solve "32 x 32, one student reasoned, I solved it by thinking
powers of 2. 32 is 2 to the fifth, and squaring this is 2 to the tenth, which I just know
is 1024'" (p. 103).
Although iterative factoring also involves a knowledge of exponential
arithmetic, this approach does not entail the use of the rules for operating with
exponents. For example, 27 multiplied by 32 can be calculated by doubling the
factor 27, 5 times: 54, 108, 216, 432, 864 (Hope, 1985, p. 366). However, this
approach is rather cumbersome when finding the product of larger factors, given the
number of iterations required. It is therefore useful primarily in situations where
powers of two or three are involved.
Whereas strategies that involve factoring entail the transformation of a
calculation into series of products, other strategies depend on the calculation being
transformed into a series of sums or differences. Hope and Sherrill (1987, p. 102)
have identified four approaches that are based on the distributive properties of
multiplication and division: additive distribution, subtractive distribution, fractional
distribution, and quadratic distribution (see Tables 2.1 & 2.4).
By convention, division is a worked from the left procedure. The most
significant digits are considered first. A convenient mental approach to calculating
64 4 is reported by Flournoy (1954): "I know that 60 4 is 15 and one more 4 is 64
makes 16" (p. 149). This approach can be represented as: (60 + 4) 4 = (60 4) +
104
105
106
107
SHORT-TERM MEMORY
WORKING STORAGE
EXECUTIVE PROCESSOR
ANSWER
LONG-TERM MEMORY
CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE
Declarative Knowledge
(Network of stored facts)
PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE
(Network of known strategies)
METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE
(Beliefs about ability to
compute mentally)
Figure 2.3.
108
109
110
(Silver, 1987, p. 37), as depicted in Figure 2.3. In view of the findings that mental
strategies tend to be adapted to the specific characteristics of the numerical
situations, particularly in out-of-school settings (Carraher et al., 1985, p. 25;
Murtaugh, 1985, p. 191; Scribner, 1984, p. 38), real-world knowledge, which can be
applied to assist in understanding the problem task environment, has particular
relevance for mental computation.
With respect to the Woolfolk's (1987, p. 258) first component, metacognitive
knowledge held in long-term memory concerns an individual's beliefs about
mathematics and opinions of their ability to perform particular mathematical
procedures in particular contexts (Silver, 1987, p. 42), affective components of
mental computation discussed previously (see Table 2.1). Metacognition also refers
to what Silver (1987, p. 37) designates meta-level processes, namely, the cognitive
monitoring processes of self-monitoring, regulation and evaluation of the cognitive
activity (Silver, 1987, p. 49), processes related to knowing how and knowing
whenWoolfolk's (1987) second component. These processes are thought to be
part of the executive control processes in short-term memory that operate on and
control the flow of information through the memory systems (Woolfolk, 1987, p.
259).
Based on chronometric evidence in relation to operations with basic facts,
Ashcraft (1982) has postulated a fact retrieval model for mental computation.
According to this model, older children and adults store an increasingly large
number of numerical equivalents in long-term memory. The growth in declarative
knowledge allows a gradual shift from "an initial reliance on procedural knowledge
and methods such as counting...to retrieval from a network representation of basic
facts" (Ashcraft, 1982, p. 213), a view in accordance with that of Svenson and
Sjoberg (1982, p. 91) discussed previously. The fact retrieval model assumes that
solution speed increases with an increased involvement of declarative knowledge
(Ashcraft, 1982, p. 233). This assumption has its parallel in the cognitive
characteristics of individuals proficient with mental computation beyond the basic
facts, people who have been found to exhibit a large store of numerical equivalents
rich in relationships.
Ashcraft's (1982) model holds that all procedural processes are slow, an
assumption that Baroody (1983) believes to be incorrect. In his view, efficient
number fact knowledge is due not only to an increase in declarative knowledge, but
111
more importantly to the development of procedural knowledge. "As the child learns
rules, heuristics, and principles, these supplant less efficient procedural processes
such as informal counting algorithms. Moreover, as these rules, heuristics, and
principles become more secure and interconnected, their use becomes more
automatic" (Baroody, 1983, p. 227). Hence, principled procedural processes are
believed to be the key factor in the efficient production of number facts, even for
adults, with the most important developmental shift being away from inefficient
strategies that rely on counting to the use of spontaneous procedural knowledge
(Baroody, 1983, p. 227).
Whether this view has legitimacy when considering mental computation
beyond the basic facts is yet to be determined. With respect to basic fact
production, Baroody (1984, p. 152) cautions that whatever the relative importance
that should be attributed to declarative and procedural knowledge it is too early to
conclude that any one model of mental computation is clearly superior.
Nonetheless, focusing on such knowledge, which these models entail, provides a
useful framework for analysing the role of long-term memory components in
mentally computing beyond the basic facts.
2.8
112
situation (Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 100; R. E. Reys, 1992, p. 63). High achievers,
therefore, tend to use a variety of methods for computing mentally (Olander &
Brown, 1959, p. 99).
Based on a study of the strategies used by less and more competent children
in Years 2 to 7, McIntosh (1991a, p. 3) observed that generally the latter start to use
particular strategies earlier than the less able and in so doing make more active use
of place value strategies (see Tables 2.3 & 2.4). Additionally, they have superior
number fact knowledge. Although the non-proficient gradually increase their
repertoire of strategies, they tend to rely more on elementary counting (see Table
2.2) and the use of external aids such as fingers.
Strategies based on a relational use of place value, such as use fives, tens
and/or hundreds and work from the left (see Table 2.4), were used as much by
competent children in Years 2 to 4 as by the least competent in Years 5 to 7
(McIntosh, 1991a, p. 3). Except for children in Year 7, who often were able to
answer a question by recall, those who displayed proficiency tended "to manipulate
numbers and exploit the place value aspects of them in a dynamic way" (McIntosh,
1991a, p. 3), a finding supported by Olander and Brown (1959). Students classified
as high achievers were more likely to use a place-grouping approach (see Table
2.4) than were those classified as low achievers (Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 98).
The differences between the mental strategies used by proficient and nonproficient mental calculators reflect different uses of long-term and short-term
memory systems (Hitch, 1977, p. 337; Hunter, 1978, p. 343). With respect to
Shakuntala Devi, a skilled adult mental calculator, Jensen (1990, p. 270) suggests
that an abnormally efficient encoding and retrieval system for long-term memory
largely overcomes the basic information processing limitations of short-term
memory. However, as discussed previously, there is considerable controversy in
the chronometric literature (Ashcraft, 1982, 1983; Baroody, 1983, 1984) as to the
way in which this information is encoded, particularly with respect to the relative
importance of the role of declarative and procedural knowledge in the calculative
process.
Fayol et al. (1987, pp. 187-188) suggest that, for verbally presented arithmetic
problems, arriving at a solution implies the use of three kinds of mental operations.
These are: (a) storing of information as a whole until the task is understood, (b)
searching long-term memory for appropriate schemata to organise and solve the
113
problem, and (c) applying the problem solving process to the data as well as
controlling its execution. This implies that arriving at a solution relies on the use of
particular computational strategies or on prestored knowledge in long-term memory
(Fayol et al., 1987, p. 188). Storing information during processing, together with the
processing itself, places demands on working memory.
However, there appears to be only a weak relationship between mental
computation performance and short-term memory capacity (Hope & Sherrill, 1987,
p. 110; Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 98). Hope and Sherrill (1987) suggest that
"through the judicious selection of a calculative strategy, a skilled calculator can get
by with fewer short-term memory resources than the selection of more inefficient
strategies would necessitate" (p. 110). Individual differences in mental calculation
can therefore be conjectured to depend upon differences in the choice of
computational strategy, which are dependent upon a knowledge of useful numerical
equivalents, and on the effects that such a choice has on the capacity to process
arithmetical data (Hope, 1985, p. 358; Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 99).
114
her love of numbers. As a child, "numbers and arithmetic were her favorite toys'"
(Jensen, 1990, pp. 269-270). In common with other skilled mental calculators, Devi
perceives numbers in everyday situations in idiosyncratic waysfor example,
interpreting the number 720 on a car's license plate as factorial six. "Each [number]
evokes many associations and transformations, some more interesting than others"
(Jensen, 1990, p. 271).
Hunter (1977a, p. 38) has suggested that an increase in calculative ability, by
whatever means, necessitates the acquisition of a system of calculative strategies.
These are dependent upon the particular way in which numbers are viewed and
therefore on the store of declarative knowledge in long-term memory. This
knowledge "builds up, piece by piece, as a byproduct of its usefulness in pursuits
which interest the individual. There is relatively little deliberate memorization bleakly
undertaken for its own sake" (Hunter, 1978, p. 343). Different skilled mental
calculators employ markedly different calculative systems. One characteristic of
these systems is the direction in which the digits in the solution are usually
producedin a left-to-right or right-to-left order (Hunter, 1977a, p. 39), as presented
in Table 2.4. Hunter (1977a, pp. 38-39) identifies two general properties of the
systems of strategies used by proficient mental calculators. Firstly, solving
problems in terms of the system saves effort. Problems can be solved in a shorter
time. Additionally, the solving of problems that were previously too difficult can then
be achieved. Secondly, effort is required to acquire this energy efficient system.
The system of calculative plans or strategies is developed through experience
with computing mentally (Hunter, 1977a, p. 39). The same degree of constant
practice, undivided attention and knowledge, essential to the development of
proficiency in other fields of human endeavour, is required (Hope, 1985, p. 372).
With lack of practice, skill deteriorates (Hunter, 1977a, p. 40). Charlene's parents
have suggested that she "was faster and more accurate in calculating mentally
when she was younger because she used to play and practice with numbers more
[often]'" (Hope, 1987, p. 337).
Some researchers have achieved some success in improving mental
computation ability through extended periods of practice. College students, who
were given three hundred hours of systematic practice with mental multiplication
strategies used by expert mental calculators, reduced their average solution time for
multiplying five- by two-digit numbers from around 130 to 30 seconds (Staszewski,
115
1988, cited in Jensen, 1990, p. 272). However, as Jensen (1990, p. 272) notes,
such students still do not demonstrate the skill of a lightning calculator such as Devi.
For calculating prodigies, "it seems necessary to posit some initial, probably innate,
advantage on which practice can merely capitalize" (Jensen, 1990, p. 273).
Individuals with an exceptional ability for calculating exact answers mentally
are characterised by diversity and widely different accomplishments. Hunter
(1977a, p. 39) notes that such an ability has been evident in children, illiterates and
gifted mathematicians, as well in those who have mental deficiencies. Some excel
in a limited range of problems, while others are able to solve quite rapidly a wide
range of numerical problems using a variety of ingenious techniques. Others attack
reasonably simple problems by slow and conventional methods, but are remarkable
for their ability to calculate without external aids. For some, average
accomplishments may be considered exceptional, given their limited ability in other
areas.
With respect to Shakuntala Devi, "to all appearances...a perfectly normal and
charming lady" (Jensen, 1990, p. 263), her exceptional skill may be due to her being
able, as a child, to function in a "high fidelity attentional mode" (Jensen, 1990, p.
273) when calculating mentally. However, the source of such exceptional skill
remains uncertain. It may prove to have more to do with motivation than primarily
with attention or ability. As Jensen (1990, p. 273) points out, the biographies of
exceptional performers in many fields record an extreme devotion to practice. From
reports concerning skilled mental calculators, Hunter (1977a, p. 40) suggests that
two general conclusions can be drawn: (a) Individuals gradually develop distinctive
calculative systems, which arise from their experiences with numerical situations,
and which facilitate solving particular types of problems with less effort; and (b) the
limitations of short-term memory place restrictions on the accomplishments of
mental calculators.
116
117
students, Hope and Sherrill (1987, p. 109) reported that although the difference in
their abilities to recall basic multiplication facts was statistically significant, it was not
substantial. Hence, at least for Grade 11 and 12 students, basic fact mastery may
not be an important factor contributing to differences in mental calculation
performance. With respect to recalling larger numerical equivalents, although the
ability of the skilled students to recall large 2-digit squares was markedly superior,
their knowledge of the extended mental multiplication tables went only slightly
beyond 10 x 10 (Hope & Sherrill, 1987, p. 109).
118
119
120
121
answers are combined to form a final solution. As Hope and Sherrill (1987) have
observed, when using distribution strategies "the retention of a single result [is]
accomplished by continually retrieving a sum, updating by adding a newly calculated
partial product, and storing the new sum. In the case of factoring, a running product
rather than a sum [is] continually modified" (p. 109) see, for example, additive
distribution and general factoring in Table 2.4. This approach, together with the
tendency of skilled mental calculators to work rapidly, reduces short-term memory
load. When working rapidly, numbers set aside for subsequent use are brought into
the calculation before much forgetting can occur (Hunter, 1977a, p. 43). Speed is
gained by excluding all irrelevances. Writing of Professor Aitken, Hunter (1977a)
observed that "when calculating, he is physically relaxed and inattentive to
everything but the calculation....He solves a problem with concentrated and
streamlined effort" (p. 37).
In conclusion, efficient mental strategies are essentially those that (a) proceed
from left-to-right, (b) eliminate the need for carrying, and (c) allow the progressive
incorporation of partial answers into a single result (Hope & Sherrill, 1978, p. 108)
(see Table 2.4). Hence, the fostering of an ability to compute mentally should
centre on the development of strategies which enable an individual to make efficient
use of a limited capacity for mentally handling data (Hunter, 1977a, p. 43). Hence:
Such an advocacy arises from the finding that teaching the standard written
algorithms for addition and subtraction to Grade 2 and 3 children may account for
the replacement of left-to-right strategies, based on out-of-school mathematical
knowledge, by inefficient right-to-left approaches to calculating mentally (Cooper et
al., 1996, p. 158).
122
2.9
123
124
Traditional Approach
Reminiscent of the role of mental arithmetic as a means of exercising the mind,
as advocated by the proponents of faculty psychology in the 19th century, Davidson
(1980) has called for a return to:
The good old days when our teachers hammered mental arithmetic into us as
students....Starting a lesson with 10 "quickies" helps to sharpen up the mental
processes and gets the students thinking about mathematics right from the
start of the lesson. Answers should be corrected quickly so that the normal
lesson can be started as soon as possible. (p. 24)
125
Alternative Approaches
Although the traditional approach to mental computation is dismissed as
inappropriate for fostering efficient and flexible mental strategies, a preferred
methodology for their development, based on a knowledge of how children learn
mathematics, is as yet unclear (McIntosh, 1991, p. 6; Reys & Barger, 1994, p. 38;
Zepp, 1976, p. 103). Referring to mental multiplication, but applicable to the other
three operations, Hazekamp (1986, p. 117) has observed that little is known about
how children develop strategies for mental computation. Nonetheless, there is
evidence to suggest that gains are made where systematic instruction is provided
(Flournoy, 1954, p. 153; Gracey, 1994, pp. 112-116; Josephina, 1960, p. 200;
Markovits & Sowder, 1994, p. 22; Schall, 1973, pp. 365-366). Schall (1973, pp. 365366) concluded that short, frequent exercises in mental arithmetic seemed to be a
126
127
solving problems that arise in natural settings or as part of planned problem solving
experiences (Reys & Barger, 1994, p. 39). Children are given opportunities to build
distinctive calculative systems, a feature that characterises skilled mental
calculators (Hunter, 1977a, p. 40).
The third approach suggested by B. J. Reys (1991, p. 9), and supported by
Carroll (1996, p. 8), is an amalgam of these two approaches. The focus is on
discussion and on sharing the devised mental strategies with peers and teachers.
Such an approach leads children to think about alternative strategies as they listen
to the ideas of others, to "negotiate shared meaning" (Masingila et al., 1994, p. 13).
Although a teacher, under this approach, does not present a defined set of
strategies to the children, at times it may be appropriate to introduce different ways
of thinking about a problem and in so doing provide children with alternative paths to
the solution of a particular problem, to introduce strategies which may not be
spontaneously invented by children (Carroll, 1996, p. 8). For example, given that
low proficiency students tend to use inefficient right-to-left procedures, Cooper et al.
(1996, p. 159) suggest that such children may benefit from direct teaching of left-toright strategies (see Table 2.4). However, in so doing it is essential that children do
not gain the impression that one strategy is necessarily superior to another, merely
because it is the focus of attention (Cockcroft, 1982, pp. 75-76, para 256; Trafton,
1992, p. 92). Hence, Carroll (1996, p. 8) has suggested that the dilemma over how
to facilitate the development of number sense while providing students with powerful
mental strategies is one for which a solution is not readily apparent.
Greeno (1991, p. 173), in context with the development of number sense, has
suggested that it is a natural, though inappropriate, response to treat mental
computation as a topic in which a set of identified skills becomes the focus. Such
an approach places value only on established mathematical techniques with the
result that children "come to feel that their intuitive ideas and methods are not
related to real mathematics" (Clements & Battista, 1990, p. 35). Further, strategies
memorised without understanding do not aid the development of number sense,
including an ability to flexibly think about numbers, a characteristic of skilled mental
calculators, nor does rote memorisation aid the development of a comprehensive
view of computation (Rathmell & Trafton, 1990, p. 171). It is likely that where
standard strategies are taught, mental computation will lose many of its
128
129
knowledge is refined and revised in the social setting of the classroom, and through
which children come to understand that which is implicit in particular mathematical
situations. "When children are given opportunities to talk about their mathematical
understandings, problems of genuine communication arise. These problems, as
well as the mathematical tasks themselves, constitute occasions for learning
mathematics" (Yackel et al., 1990, p. 12).
In classrooms that encourage exploration, questioning, verification, and sensemaking, the teacher's role is one of guide and moderator, rather than a dispenser of
answers, the traditional role of the teacher (B. J. Reys, 1992, p. 95), thus making
school mathematics more like folk mathematics (Maier, 1980, p. 23). The guidance
provided by the teacher is a feature that distinguishes constructivism from unguided
discovery (Clements & Battista, 1990, p. 35). Mathematical authority does not
reside solely with the teacher, but in partnership with the children as an intellectual
community (Yackel et al., 1990, p. 18).
In summary, the preferred role of the teacher is that of an intellectual coach.
The Mathematical Sciences Education Board and National Research Council (1990,
p. 40) have outlined the various roles that an intellectual coach assumes and in so
doing have described the ways in which mathematics teaching should be
approached. Equally, the role descriptions describe the ways in which teachers
should approach the task of developing skill with mental computation. At various
times the teacher is required to act as: (a) a role model for the problem solving
process, (b) a consultant, (c) a moderator who leaves much of the decision-making
to the students, (d) an interlocutor who encourages self-reflection, and (e) a
questioner who challenges students to define their strategies and conclusions.
130
[It] is not a drill session, not even a practice session. Still less is it a
testing session. It is simply an opportunity for playing with the numbers
and exploring the way they seem to relate to one another and the ways in
which one can think about these relationships. (C. Thornton, 1985, pp. 910)
McIntosh et al. (1994, p. 9) maintain that the aims are to help children to see
how to calculate mentally and to realise that mental computation is a creative
process, acceptive of many solution paths. Instruction needs to reflect the spirit of
computing mentallyto explore different ways of reasoning and to share and justify
solutions (Rathmell & Trafton, 1990, p. 158). Everyone needs to be involved and to
find such involvement enjoyable. This can be facilitated by small-group work where
the chance of dispiriting failure is reduced. Further, when working in small groups
difficulties can more easily be perceived and handled sensitively, with children
challenged according to their abilities (Cockcroft, 1982, p. 93, para 319). However,
"mental work will be enjoyed if it is challenging only when the pupils are ready to be
challenged" (Jones, 1988, p. 44). Children need to experience success with mental
computation. Such success is self-fulfilling (Jones, 1988, p. 44) and contributes to
the development of the affective components of mental computation (see Table 2.1),
particularly the gaining of confidence.
Although children cannot be made to think mathematically, their curiosity can
be aroused through their participation in activities that require mental
computationactivities that include games and puzzles (Ewbank, 1977, p. 28).
Maier (1980) suggests that such experiences assist in the development of a
"friendliness with numbers" (p. 23), a key aspect in the formation of a dense web of
connections between numbers stored as declarative knowledge. Whether the
problem context is one from real-life or purely mathematical, the aim is to encourage
a flexible approach and to make explicit through discussion the advantages and
insights that come from alternative strategies (French, 1987, p. 39), thus supporting
the development of appropriate mental computation strategies and the Conceptual
Components and Related Concepts and Skills that underpin them (see Table 2.1).
131
Although there is a role for a weekly series of brief focus sessions, of around
fifteen minutes each, Trafton (1978, p. 212) asserts that mental computation needs
to become an integral part of classroom learning. This view is supported by
Carraher et al. (1985) in their call for educators to "question the practice of treating
mathematical systems as formal subjects from the outset and should instead seek
ways of introducing these systems in contexts which allow them to be sustained by
human daily sense" (p. 28). Given the idiosyncrasy of mental strategies, Barbara
Reys (1985, p. 46) cautions that mental computation is not a topic that can fit into a
certain grade level or sequence of the curriculum. Integrating mental computation
into all relevant classroom activities should aid children in the realisation that mental
techniques are legitimate computational alternatives for particular calculative needs.
However, when focus sessions are conducted, it is better to discuss several
approaches to a few problems rather than focussing on one approach for each of a
large number of questions (McIntosh, 1988, p. 261). The emphasis can therefore
be placed on how answers were calculated in a range of contexts with a range of
number types and operations, rather than on whether they are simply correct or
incorrect. "By merely reinforcing right answers and correcting wrong ones,
traditional mathematics instruction unwittingly stifles children's ability to do their own
thinking" (Kamii, 1990, p. 28).
Both McIntosh et al. (1995, p. 36) and Robert Reys et al. (1995, p. 332) report,
for Australian and Japanese students, respectively, that, for some items, the effect
of mode of presentation on performance is significantfor example Year 5 children
gained more correct responses for 182 + 97 when presented visually and for +
when presented orally (McIntosh et al., 1995, p. 64). It is likely that the varied
modes of presentation lead to different strategies being employed by different
students, resulting in differential performances levels (McIntosh, et al., 1995, p. 60).
McIntosh (1988, p. 261) suggests that although many tasks may be presented
visually, the answers should be oral. By so doing, children are able to focus on the
mental strategy used rather than on writing the response, a view supported by
Spitzer (1948, p. 215). In Frenchs (1987, p. 41) view, the oral presentation of
problem contexts places these contexts closer to those faced in everyday situations,
as well as eliminating the reading difficulties which some children may experience.
The relationships between numbers more clearly become the focus (Hazekamp,
1986, p. 123).
132
133
Paper-and-Pencil Computation
Computational
Estimation
Figure 2.4.
Mental
Computation
1966, cited in Ewbank, 1977, p. 29). Related to the development of this agility is a
child's proficiency with computational estimation. In Lindquist's view (1984, p. 599),
this should occur prior to the introduction of paper-and-pencil procedures,
particularly before the standard written algorithm for each operation becomes the
focus. Figure 2.5 presents an alternative view of the sequence in which
computational skills should be developed.
134
Computational
Estimation
Mental
Computation
Paper-and-Pencil Computation
Figure 2.5.
this finding has led to the belief that a focus on computational estimation should not
occur too soon after the introduction of a particular operation. Rather, the teachers
should focus on developing (a) number size concepts, (b) mental computation
strategies, and (c) on estimation-type problems that do not require the coordination
of complex skills.
With respect to written procedures, if standard paper-and-pencil algorithms are
introduced after an initial focus on strategies for calculating both exact and
135
136
137
1.
138
2.
What is the place of mental computation within the calculative process and
particularly its relationships with computational estimation?
139
However, the mental strategies used, and the numbers manipulated, are subsets of
those involved in situations where the mental calculation of exact answers is
undertaken. The interrelationships between mental computation and computational
estimation strategies, and their reliance on number comparison and elements of
number sense has led Threadgill-Sowder (1988, pp. 194-195) to suggest that their
development occurs in a spiral fashion, each feeding on and strengthening the
others.
Although mental computation is considered to be an essential prerequisite to
computational estimation (see Figure 2.2), Robert Reys (1984, p. 551) has
suggested that the reverse does not apply. This appears to be in conflict with Irons'
(1990b, p. 1) view that the use of getting closer strategies during computational
estimation may assist in the development of flexible approaches for calculating
exact answers. Nonetheless, it is possible that although a limited range of mental
computation strategies may be essential for initial experiences with computational
estimation, strategies for calculating exact answers may be refined by additional
experiences during the calculation of approximate answers.
3.
Terms used to describe the mental calculation of exact answers during the
past century have been characterised by their impreciseness. Although a concern
for developing skill with the calculation of approximate answers is relatively new to
primary school mathematics curricula (B. J. Reys, 1986a, p. 22), the use of such
terms as mental arithmetic, oral arithmetic and mental to refer to the mental
calculation of exact answers, often included references to approximate answers.
Additionally, in using these terms, the focus was on the correctness of the answer
rather than on the strategies used. Mental arithmetic was seen as a preamble to the
real arithmetic, usually written, which was to follow.
In an endeavour to distinguish between the mental calculation of exact and
approximate answers, as well as to shift the focus from the answer to the processes
used during calculation, it has become customary in the mathematics education
literature to define mental computation as the process of producing an exact answer
mentally without resort to calculators or any external recording device, usually with
140
141
4.
What are the roles currently perceived for mental computation within and
beyond the classroom?
142
5.
What are the affective and cognitive components, including commonly used
mental strategies, that constitute skill in computing exact answers mentally?
143
mentally (see Table 2.1). Essential to this is an ability to translate a problem into a
more mentally manageable form so that the demands on memory may be shifted
from short- to long-term memory. Based on a proposal of Threadgill-Sowder (1988,
p. 184), two key questions have been hypothesised, questions which are considered
cyclically during the process of mental computation. These relate to the
modification of the numbers embodied in the mathematical situation so that the
resulting operations may be answered by recall, and to a consideration of how the
operational sequence will proceed as a consequence of the way in which the
numbers have been expressed (see Table 2.1). Underpinning these processes is
an individual's conceptual knowledge related to, for example, place value, basic
facts, numeration, arithmetical principles and their relationships.
The classification of mental strategies for calculating exact answers beyond the
basic facts was made difficult by a number of characteristics of the available
research. Not only has such research been limited (McIntosh et al., 1995, p. 2), but
also it has primarily focussed on addition and subtraction. In instances where
studies have focussed on all four operations, clear distinctions have not always
been adequately drawn between the strategies used for basic facts and those used
to calculate with larger numbers (see Section 2.7.4). An added difficulty was that
the data was obtained from a range of samples, varying with respect to age, grade,
ability, cultural background, and contexts. Further, as McIntosh (1990b, p. 13)
points out, the classification of strategies has often relied on subjective
interpretations of interview protocols, and on written reports of past performances by
expert mental calculators (Hope, 1985, p. 358), thus preventing certainty, on the part
of the researcher, with respect to the use of particular strategies in particular
contexts. Finally, these difficulties have been compounded by the absence of
agreed descriptors for many of the commonly identified approaches.
Nonetheless, the analysis presented in this chapter, centred on a model
derived from one proposed by McIntosh (1990c, p. 1), provides a comprehensive
summary of identified strategies. The following categories were used as organisers:
Counting strategies (see Table 2.2), Strategies based upon instrumental
understanding (see Table 2.3), and Heuristic strategies based upon relational
understanding (see Table 2.4). Counting strategies, which primarily rely on
counting-on or counting-back, do not entail the manipulation of complex numerical
relationships, a skill indicative of a well-developed sense of number. The category
144
6.
What are the affective and cognitive characteristics exhibited by skilled mental
calculators, including the role that memory plays in the process of calculating
exact answers mentally?
145
7.
What are the teaching approaches and sequence necessary for the
development of mental computation skills?
146
147
However, children should be challenged only when they are ready to be challenged
(J. P. Jones, 1988, p. 44). Although this may be difficult for a teacher to determine,
the critical indicator is the perceived confidence with which a child approaches
mental computation in particular situations.
The overriding emphasis needs to be on integrating mental computation into all
relevant classroom activities in an endeavour to maximise the links to the real-world
of the child, thus capitalising on their idiosyncratic mathematical knowledge.
Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to the emphasis on mental viz--viz
written methods of computation at particular stages within a class mathematics
program. There is some evidence to suggest that children have difficulty with
mental computation when paper-and-pencil skills, particularly the standard written
algorithms, are developed prior to a focus on mental strategies (Cooper et al., 1992,
p. 100; Musser, 1982, p. 40). This has resulted in the suggestion that, for each
operation, the focus should be on mental computation prior to the introduction of
written procedures (see Figure 2.5). Carol Thornton et al. (1995, p. 40) have
suggested that the consequences of such an approach would be the development
of more flexible computational strategies, both mental and written. This contrasts
with the inflexibility of the mental strategies which result from the traditional
approach to teaching mental computation.
148
occur without considerable teacher education, and [these] will take both time and a
concerted effort by the entire mathematics education community" (p. 12).
The nature of the teacher education required is not only dependent upon the
current state of teacher knowledge and attitudes towards mental computation, but
also on an understanding of the context within which these have developed. Hence,
prior to the development of a proposed syllabus strand for mental computation
(Chapter 5) and a consideration of the implications for professional development for
Queensland teachers (Chapter 6), an understanding of their current beliefs and
practices needs to be gained (Chapter 4). Additionally, an understanding of the
nature of mental computation and how it has been taught under each of the
Queensland syllabuses provides the background and context for current beliefs and
practices. An analysis of mental computation in the mathematics syllabuses in
Queensland from 1860 to 1965 is the focus of the next chapter (Chapter 3).
152
CHAPTER 3
3.1
Introduction
As stated in Chapter 1, little has been documented about mental computation
153
3.1.1 Method
In contrast to empirical research, there is no single, definable method of
historical inquiry (Edson, 1986, cited by Wiersma, 1995, p. 234). Such inquiry is
primarily qualitative, with the process being essentially a holistic one. Although the
steps in undertaking historical research can be delineated, there is considerable
overlap of the activities associated with eachfor example, analysis and
interpretation occurs during the identification of sources of evidence, during data
collection, as well as during the synthesising and interpretation phases.
Subsequent to the identification of Mental Arithmetic in Queensland: 1860-1965 as
the topic to be investigated in this study, the following steps were undertaken:
The reporting of the analysis and interpretation of the data, together with
the conclusions drawnthis chapter.
Sources of Evidence
During this study, the basic rule of historical research was followed, namely to
place an emphasis on primary sources of evidence (Wiersma, 1995, p. 238). The
primary data, upon which the issues of significance to mental computation in
Queensland were analysed, were obtained from:
Queensland mathematics schedules and syllabuses (1860-1964) published
in the Queensland Government Gazette (1860-1904), The Education Office
Gazette (1904), and as separate documents (1914-1964).
Annual reports of General Inspectors (1876-1904) and District Inspectors of
Schools (1869-1965) published as part of the annual reports of the Board of
General Education (1865-1875), Department of Public Instruction (18761939), or as archival material (1940-1965).
154
Data were also obtained from such secondary sources as (a) the reports of
studies into aspects of Queensland educationfor example, Greenhalghs (1957)
study of the 1952 syllabus; (b) books and articles on the history of Queensland
educationLogan & Clarke (1984), for example; and (c) newspaper reports and
articles of relevance to the teaching of mental arithmetic in Queensland primary
classroomsfor example, Scientific & Useful (1882). Wherever possible, the data
from these sources were cross-checked with the original references, or more
generally against such primary sources of data as the reports of District Inspectors.
The major sources of historical evidence were obtained from (a) the
Queensland Department of Educations History Unit, (b) the Queensland State
Archives, and (c) the library of the Queensland Teachers Union. Data were also
obtained from documents, books, and articles held in (a) the Fryer and Main
Libraries, University of Queensland; (b) John Oxley Library and State Library of
Queensland; (c) Mitchell Library, Sydney; and (d) private collections.
During historical research sources of data need to be subjected to both external
and internal criticism to determine their authenticity and validity with respect to the
topic being investigated (Rodwell, 1992, p. 97). Given the nature of this study and
its sources of information, determining the authenticity and validity of the primary
documents was not as significant an issue as for those studies not primarily based
on official documents and reports. The authenticity of the syllabus documents,
District Inspectors reports and articles in the Queensland Teachers Journalthe
documents on which this study was largely basedwas without question.
155
The validity of the beliefs espoused in the reports and articles was substantiated
primarily through the completeness of the historical record and the consistency with
which the various District Inspectors and writers expressed their views. All the
reports of District Inspectors were accessed, either directly as archival material from
1940, or in the Annual Reports of the Board of General Education and Department
of Public Instruction prior to 1940. Although only a summary of each District
Inspectors report was published in the Annual Reports from 1920 to 1939, it was
evident that the majority of District Inspectors commented on mental arithmetic, as
part of their reports on Arithmetic teaching and performance in the schools within
their inspectorial districts. Nonetheless, the detail in the reports varied, with some
District InspectorsMacgroarty during the period 1879 to 1902 and Mutch from 1906
to 1925, for examplebeing particularly insightful.
During the analysis of the data gathered and during the preparation of this
studys findings, cognisance was given to the inherent biases within the various
reports and articles. It was recognised that key sources of data were often written
from inherently conflicting perspectives about what occurred or should have
occurred in classrooms. The impact of particular reports of District Inspectors and
the articles in the journals of the Queensland Teachers Union was also unclear.
However, a consideration of the opinions and recommendations expressed by
different authors over time has enabled a clear understanding of the issues
surrounding mental arithmetic to be ascertained and reported.
Research Questions
156
1.
2.
3.
What was the role of mental computation within the mathematics curricula
from 1860 to 1965?
4.
What was the nature of the teaching practices used to develop a child's
ability to calculate exact answers mentally during the period 1860-1965?
5.
What was the nature of the resources used to support the teaching of
mental computation during the period 1860-1965?
These questions were derived from the fourth principal purpose of this research
project, which was stated in Section 1.3, and emphasised in the introduction to this
chapter.
Structure of Analysis
The terms used to describe the ability to calculate exact answers mentally.
157
The teaching methods used to develop skill with calculating exact answers
mentally.
3.2
by Queensland educators. District Inspector Mutch (1906), in his annual report for
1905, reiterating Fish's (1874, p. vii) position, rhetorically asked: "Should not all
arithmetic be mental, and the pencil called into requisition only when the numbers
are large? Are not slate and paper used merely to lessen the strain on the
memory?" (Mutch, 1906, p. 63). From another perspective, it can be considered
that all computation, including written and technological, involves a mental
component.
However, from a review of the primary sources of historical data, there appears
to be little documentary evidence to link mental arithmetic specifically to issues
which surrounded and underpinned the syllabuses formulated during the period
being investigated. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to assume that such issues would
have had some influence, at least indirectly, on the nature of mental arithmetic, as
embodied in each of the syllabuses, and as presented to children. Among the key
issues which impinged on the development and implementation of syllabuses were:
(a) the function of primary education, including its role as a preparation for the afterlife of the child; (b) the focus of teachingthe subject or the child; (c) the principles
on which the syllabuses from 1905 were based; (d) syllabus interpretation and
overloading; and (e) teacher freedom versus syllabus specificity. These issues and
the links between them, which constitute the context within which mental arithmetic
was taught, are to be explored using the following organisers: (a) Focus of Syllabus
Development and Implementation, (b) Principles Underlying the Syllabuses from
1905, and (c) Syllabus Interpretation and Overloading.
158
159
rudimentary instruction which would enable the child to become a good member of
society" (Griffiths, 1874, p. 395). This view reflected that of "Omega" (1871) who
suggested that:
The...object [of education was] to develope (sic) and improve to the utmost all
the powers and faculties, and to give instruction in all those branches of
knowledge which are considered suitable and necessary to our probable
circumstances and condition in after-life....[Education also included] the
formation of good, and what is much more important, the eradication of bad
habits [particularly for the poorer and working classes]. (p. 8)
The main focus of the 1876 Syllabus was therefore on reading, writing and
arithmetic, although object lessons, drill and gymnastics, vocal music and
needlework for girls were also included. In keeping with the rudimentary nature of
the desired instruction, the higher mathematics subjects, Euclid and algebra, which
were part of the 1860 Syllabus for the Fifth Class, were not considered necessary
for a primary education.
The frequency of syllabus change between 1876 and 1905 (see Table 3.1)
reflected the indecision surrounding the nature of the curriculum for children in
upper primary classes, particularly for those who were not able to win scholarships
for a secondary education3 at one of the private fee-charging Grammar Schools
(Dagg, 1971, p. 14). The modifications that were made were undertaken to
accommodate pressures for the inclusion of practical subjects, drawing in 1894, for
example, but without disturbing the predominance of the mental disciplinary
approach to education (Lawry, 1968, pp. 635-636). Reports from District Inspectors
indicating poor results in formal subjects, which included mental arithmetic, were
ignored by Anderson (Lawry, 1968, p. 570).
Despite the progressive outlook embodied in the 1904 Syllabus (Wyeth, 1955,
p. 157), in essence it maintained a belief in a narrowly conceived primary school
curriculum (Lawry, 1968, pp. 604, 606). As Ewart (1905) pointed out in his report for
1904: "What is needed...is to show how little new' there is in it. Stand the three R's'
where they did? Undoubtedly" (p. 161). The Education Conferences4 of 1903 and
1904, attended by departmental officials, District Inspectors and teachers, thus
avoided the task of a full curriculum revision, although reports were prepared by a
160
161
Table 3.1
Queensland Mathematics Schedules and Syllabuses: 1860-1965
1860
1876
Schedule V: Table of the minimum amount of attainments required from pupils for
admission into each class in primary schools. (1876). Queensland Government
Gazette, XVII(36), 825.
1892
Para 143: The course of instruction for each class. (1891). In State Education Act
of 1875; together with the regulations of the Department (pp. 23-24). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Para 144: Standards of proficiency. (1891). In State Education Act of 1875;
together with the regulations of the Department (pp. 24-28). Brisbane: Government
Printer.
1894
1897
1902
1905
Schedule XIV: Course of instruction for each class. (1904). Education Office
Gazette, VI(11), 204-211.
1915
1930
1938
1948
1952
1964
162
Instruction for 1920: "Education authorities have come to recognise that education
has a life-long relationship with the various aspects of citizenshipphysical, social,
industrial, and politicaland this conception steadily widens" (Huxham, 1921, p. 21).
Education had come to be "considered in terms of life rather than of purely
intellectual equipment....[It was recognised] that the purpose of any educational
scheme is to develop the full powers of [the] personality [of the child]" (J. A.
Robinson, 1945, p. 12)the "principle of social living" outlined in the 1930 Syllabus
(Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. vi) and the 1952 Syllabus (Department of
Public Instruction, 1952a, p. 2).
The centre of interest, therefore, had shifted from the subject to the child.
Nonetheless, as an indicator of the conservative implementation of syllabuses,
particularly from 1905, is the proposition in the 1952 Syllabus that "modern thought
regards the child as the focal point in the educational process" (Department of
Public Instruction, 1952a, p. 1). Influenced by the beliefs of John Dewey6, such a
focus was first proposed in the 1904 Syllabus. The preface to the schedule
indicated that the course of instruction was designed "to increase the influence of
the school as an agent in the intellectual, moral, and social development of the
child" (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 200), a principle of utmost importance and potency
(Roe, 1915, p. 29). Ewart (1907) stressed in his report for 1906 that:
[Teachers] must learn without loss of time that there is before them in the
profession they have joined a new study they must tackle seriously, and that it
will take them all their lives to learn. That subject is the CHILD. Hitherto, it has
been arithmetic, languages, and the rest of ithow to know these, understand
them, explain them; now it must be how to bring all these in turn or together to
bear upon the life and wellbeing, the growth and development of the children
placed in their charge. (p. 39)
163
3.2.2
The development of the 1904 Syllabus occurred during the early stages of a
period, 1900 to 1914, noted for its considerable reform and progress7 in Queensland
education (Parliamentary Select Committee, 1980, p. 4). This period signalled, in
theory at least, an end to the emphasis on the theory of mental discipline, with its
focus on teacher and subject, and heralded a concern for the child (Creighton, 1993,
p. 77; Logan & E. Clarke, 1984, p. 3). Moreover, the 1904 Syllabus could be
considered to be the ideological turning point for Queensland State school curricula
(Creighton, 1993, p. 78), "an epoch in [Queensland's] educational history" (The
Revised Syllabus, 1914, p. 81). However, the high ideals expressed in the preface
to this syllabus"an excellent New Charter' for...primary schools" (The New
Syllabus, 1904, p. 143)were doomed to lie dormant, even following the passing of
Anderson's influence in mid-1904 and that of Ewart in 1909.
The preface to the 1904 Syllabus, the first to give teachers assistance in
syllabus implementation, not only provided some guidance as to how mathematics
should be taught, but, possibly more importantly, delineated the principles on which
the schedule was based. In addition to indicating that the school needed to
increase its influence on the pupils' social, moral and intellectual development, it
was stated that:
[The syllabus was] designed to give practical application in the teaching work of
schools to the principle of the correlation of the subjects of study, to make "the
self-activity of the pupil the basis of school instruction," [and] to bring the work of
the pupil into closer touch with his home and social surroundings. (Schedule
XIV, 1904, p. 200)
164
From the earliest stages the child [should be] led to deal with quantities of actual
things and with the measurement of quantities, using various units....The
youngest children should not only see but handle the quantities with which they
deal, and actually make measurements on which they are to operate....It is
valuable education for the pupil to be made to do things for himself, instead of
merely seeing the teacher do them. (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 201)
By making a child desire to solve a certain problem gets him to put his Heart
into it; it gets him to use his Head in the collection and arrangement of the
165
relevant facts; it gets him to use his Hand in the construction of apparatus to be
used in the solution of the problem. (Department of Public Instruction, 1948b, p.
16)
This statement was presented in context with an advocacy for the Project
Method, the principal manifestation of an emphasis on self-activity in the upper
grades. As Greenhalgh (1957, p. 76) pointed out, the 1930 Syllabus virtually
instructed teachers in small-schools and of upper grades in larger schools to use
this method which allowed the teacher to "set problems going, so that the pupils, in
order to solve them, must arrive at the knowledge of the [mathematical] principle or
rule" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. vii)an emphasis on self-education
was therefore advocated.
The acceptance and implementation of the principles and teaching approaches
outlined in the 1904 Syllabus relied on the training of a whole new generation of
teachers (The Queensland State Department of Education, 1966, p. 330).
Although the long awaited Teachers' College was opened in 1914, many teachers
continued to be trained under "the old hard system" (Wyeth, 1955, p. 157), the pupilteacher system not being phased out until 1935. Hence, teachers were generally
not prepared for the changed expectations. Representatives of the Queensland
Teachers' Union, during a deputation to the Minister of Public Instruction in 1946,
asserted that few teachers were undertaking an activity approach to learning due to
a lack of equipment and materials, a lack of time as well as not having an
understanding of how to incorporate activity based learning into their teaching
programs (Deputation to Minister, 1946, p. 4).
Wyeth (1955, p. 158) asserted that it would be reasonable to state that the
aspirations crystallised into specific statements of ideals in the 1904 Syllabus had
not been realised by the mid-1950s. This applied particularly to the principles on
which the syllabus was based, even though they continued to be emphasised in
subsequent syllabuses (Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 6; 1930, p. vi;
Edwards, 1951, p. 25). Further, their implementation was not supported by all
senior officers of the Department. Director-General Watkin voiced his official
antagonism to such education in his 1956 Report:
166
167
The 1904 Syllabus was the first to be accompanied not only by the principles on
which the syllabus was based, but also by suggestions concerning its
implementation. These were intended to be suggestive rather than specific, namely,
"to indicate the scope of treatment, and to lay down fundamental principles and lines
of direction at various stages of the pupils' progress; but it [did] not prescribe
detailed methods for teaching individual subjects" (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 203).
St. Ledger (1905) regarded the 1904 Syllabus as the "Teachers' Magna Carta" (p.
218). It gave freedom to the teacher. Importantly, it was accompanied by changes
to the system of inspection. No longer were District Inspectors required to examine
every child in every subject. This double change was considered to be "the most
important advance...since the passing of the Education Act of 1875" (St. Ledger,
1905, p. 218). The Queensland Teachers' Union interpreted the 1904 Syllabus as
being based on the principle of thought, whereas previous syllabuses were
considered to have been based on pressure (The New Syllabus, 1904, p. 143),
pressure from "the blighting influence of percentages" (Shirley, 1905a, p. 189).
Recognition was given to the belief that "there is no absolutely best method of
treating any subject; one method is best suited to one type of teacher, another is
best for others10" (Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 10)methods which
were surrounded in controversy (Teaching Hints, 1908, p. 15). However, teacher
freedom was not extended to the selection of course content. Director of Education
McKenna (1936, p. 12) reported that he could not agree with the absence of definite
schemes of work for teachers, as occurred in England. His disagreement, however,
appears to have arisen primarily from administrative rather than from educational
considerations. He stated that he would be disinclined to advocate the extension of
freedom of this type for teachers as it "would demand a much more highly trained
type of teacher than we have at present, and would necessitate the retention of
head teachers in the same schools for considerable periods of time" (McKenna,
1936, p. 12). Nonetheless, Edwards (1937b, p. 7), on replacing McKenna as
Director of Education, suggested that the greatest hope for educational progress lay
with improving the quality of teachers. Cramer (1937, p. 8) observed that in the
Australian states which he visited, of which Queensland was one, the preparation of
teachers was referred to as teacher training rather than teacher educating. The
focus of teacher training, Cramer (1937) observed, was the production of "a
competent school-room technician whose training [was] largely restricted to the
168
syllabus he [was] expected to teach" (p. 8), rather than the development of a welleducated individual able to adapt to various situations. Such a view was not in
conflict with teacher beliefs about education, which held that education was the act
of training, although recognition was given to the development of the various
intellectual, physical, aesthetic and moral faculties (Bensted, 1924, p. 34).
Paradoxically, although scope for teacher freedom in planning for syllabus
implementation remained a feature of syllabuses subsequent to 1905, syllabus
outlines, particularly from 1930, increased in detail. This potentially incompatible
tendency arose from a belief that inexperienced teachers needed greater guidance.
Edwards (1938a), in his memorandum to schools concerning the 1938
Amendments, emphasised that "such specification [was]...not [intended] as a
restriction of the freedom of the more experienced. Scope [was] still afforded for
originality and initiative in the inclusion of matter and the selection of method" (p. 2).
However, in his reports for 1936 and 1947, Edwards (1937a, p. 25; 1948, p. 20)
noted that the spirit of professional freedom was not always grasped by teachers.
He suggested that this, together with the calls for a greater prescription of work, was
perhaps due to:
A form of inertiaa disinclination to get off the beaten track and to depart from
methods to which they have become accustomed. [Further,] it [was] more likely
due to timidity. Many teachers [were] not prepared to accept the responsibility
of embarking on some original line of thought or action. (Edwards, 1937a, p.
25)
169
work books, were designed to place limits on the ways in which the syllabus had
been interpreted. However, the suggestions for standardised workbooks were
frowned upon by the Queensland Teachers' Union as it believed that this would
make the individualisation of learning even less likely (Burge, 1946, p. 13).
Although the 1930 Syllabus in mathematics was a very exacting one, with little
to be added to meet the requirements of the secondary school Junior Public
Examination (Greenhalgh, 1957, p. 285), it was not uncommon to find that the
examinations of District Inspectors and Head Teachers exceeded the requirements
specified for particular grades (Syllabus Debate, 1938, p. 15). As "The
Commentator" (1947) observed in the Queensland Teachers' Journal, "teachers and
inspectors went into operation when the 1930 Syllabus was published; [and this] is
not the same thing as putting the 1930 Syllabus into operation" (p. 21), a
consideration that was often overlooked by teachers who advocated syllabus
change.
A multiplicity of textbooks (see Table 3.2), all more or less unofficial, became
available to teachers, many of which were criticised for not being trialed before
170
Table 3.2
Selection of Textbooks Relevant to Mental Arithmetic Available to Queensland
Teachers From the Mid-1920s
Bevington, W. F. (Ed.). (n.d.). Queensland syllabus mental arithmetic. Brisbane: H. Pole.
Class teacher's manual of oral arithmetic for grades VII & VIII in Queensland schools. (n.d.).
Warwick: Premier Educational Publishers.
Department of Public Instruction/Education. Queensland. (1946-). Arithmetic for Queensland
schools. Brisbane: Government Printer.
Henderson, T., Irish, C. A., Bowden, L. T., & Watkin, H. G. (1932-). New syllabus arithmetic
(Brooks' Queensland School Series). Brisbane: William Brooks.
Henderson, T., Irish, C. A., Bowden, L. T., & Watkin, H. G. (1932-). New syllabus mental
arithmetic (Brooks' Queensland School Series). Brisbane: William Brooks.
a
Larcombe, H. J. (n.d.). Speed tests in mental arithmetic: Senior book 1 (The Minute a sum
series). London: Evans Brothers.
Mental arithmetic: Senior grades (The Moreton Series). (1926-). Brisbane: Moreton Printing
Company.
Mutual Aid Society, Ipswich. (n.d.). Queensland syllabus mental arithmetic: Grades VI-VII.
Sydney: Philip.
Olsen, F. J. (1953). Oral arithmetic (McLeod's School Series). Brisbane: McLeod.
b
Potter. (n.d.). Mental and intelligence tests in common-sense arithmetic. London: Pitman.
Test papers based on model work books: Grades III to VI. (n.d.). Brisbane: Pole.
Thompson, F. C. (Ed.). (1930-). The Queensland mathematics. Brisbane: Ferguson.
Wisdom, A. (1932). Arithmetical dictation.a London: University of London Press.
Note.
publication ("Debunker, 1940, p. 14). Some were compiled or, at least, supported
by District Inspectorsfor example, those prepared by the South Coast Syllabus
Notes Committee under the direction of ex-District Inspector Bevington. It was
asserted by "Debunker" (1940, p. 14) that some inspectors had insisted upon the
use of particular texts. Some years prior to this, in an endeavour to promote the
teaching of mental arithmetic, District Inspector Mutch had given the majority of
schools in his district a copy of Burt's Mental Tests in Arithmetic11, which he
171
regarded as exemplary (Mutch, 1924, p. 40). Model work books were also prepared
by District Inspectors for commercial publication. For example, District Inspectors
Router and Pascoe, assisted by District Inspectors Baker and Inglis, prepared a
series of Programmes of Work (1932), which included suggestions for oral
arithmetic for each term of the school year.
These texts tended to provide exhaustive treatments, with their maximums
becoming teachers' minimums (Darling Downs Branch, 1946, p. 21). The fear of
teachers was that if the children in their classes did not achieve high percentages on
the inspectors' test, they would be marked down (Syllabus Debate, 1938, p. 15).
The Queensland Teachers' Union believed that "all concerned, with the exception of
those most vitally concerned, the children, brushed aside the important General
Introduction [to the 1930 Syllabus] in their eagerness to get at the actual
requirements....The Syllabus was ruined by zealots with their fanatical shibboleth of
a bit ahead'" (Editorial, 1947, p. 2), an opinion shared by the Department in 1937
(Department of Public Instruction, 1937, p. 26). Pestorius (1942, p. 2) noted that
some head teachers prescribed work from textbooks rather than planning
independently from the syllabus. This was a criticism also levelled at the examiners
for the annual Scholarship examination during the 1930s and 1940s"What was
found in a Scholarship Class text book could surely be used as part of the
examination!" (Dagg, 1971, p. 57). Pestorius (1942) believed that "reliance upon the
subject matter in textbooks rather than individual planning and initiative based upon
Syllabus requirements [tended] to make the work stereotyped, and [was] likely to
[have resulted in] cramming. As Dagg (1971, p. 57) concludes, the textbooks which
often went beyond the scope of the syllabus therefore set the standard.
The General Introduction to the 1930 Syllabus recommended that "arithmetic,
while emphasizing speed and accuracy, [should] not entail long and useless
calculations" (p. vi). Further, the syllabus stressed that "the very practical purposes
that mathematical work has to serve in the child's future life should regulate the
character of its treatment in school" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 30).
Nonetheless, "Der Tag" (1936) felt compelled to write that "nothing is left out [of the
textbooks] even when ruled out by the Syllabus itself" (p. 3). In "Green Ant's" (1942,
p. 17) view, the extensions of syllabus requirements were most flagrant for mental
arithmetic. For example, in a textbook prepared by the Head Master of the Ascot
Practising School as the main author, the mental work for Grade VI included such
172
examples as: (a) Increase 83 by .37 of its value; and (b) Express
15 32
100
as a decimal
(Henderson, Irish, Bowden, & Watkin, 1935, p. 10). This, in spite of the syllabus
indicating that the oral work for Grade VI should be preparatory to the written work,
with the notes accompanying the latter indicating that "the exercises [should] deal
only with simpler fractions" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, pp. 42, 43).
Extensions to the syllabus were also encouraged by non-Queensland texts.
Larcombe's (n.d., p. 2) Speed Tests in Mental Arithmetic, for example, a text
referred to by Router and Pascoe (1932, p. ii), presented items such as the following
for pupils aged 10-12 years: 23,765 x 9 and 70,186 7.
Such instances prompted calls for the Department to publish official textbooks,
the first of which was published for Grade 3 in 1946, as a means for gaining realistic
interpretations of the syllabus (Darling Downs Branch, 1946, p. 21). With a layout
similar to that of the commercial textbooks, these texts included sets of ten
mechanical and problem arithmetic examples. However, it is unlikely that these
textbooks proved to be a panacea. As the General Secretary of the Queensland
Teachers' Union pointed out in 1951: "A teacher, a professional man, might be
expected to do his work without a text book; a coach or a crammer is useless
without one" (cited by Dagg, 1971, p. 33), a sentiment which echoed that of
Edwards in his 1930 report (Edwards, 1931, pp. 28-29).
Teacher discontent with the way in which the 1930 Syllabus had been
interpreted, together with its perceived overloading, resulted in increased teacher
input into syllabus development, to such an extent that, by 1952, the initiative for a
new syllabus "came [right through], not from the administration, but from the
teachers" (Greenhalgh, 1957, p. 84). Overloading was a traditional feature of
Queensland mathematics syllabuses, and one that reached its climax in 1930
(Dagg, 1971, p. 32). Until 1915, overloading was, in Lawry's (1968) view, primarily
due to the "absence of an articulated system of education from primary school to
university" (p. 600). Nonetheless, mathematics tended to be "marked by the logical
completeness of the schedule, based on an adult notion of what should be taught,
as opposed to what the capacity of the average child could assimilate" (Greenhalgh,
1957, p. 77).
Syllabus development to 1930 had been characterised by additions, such that,
by 1928, the primary school pupil was regarded "as a polymath in comparison with
his predecessor of twenty years [previously]" (Edwards, 1929, p. 31). However,
173
Edwards (1929), the architect of the 1930 Syllabus, believed that no subjects could
be omitted during the revision of the syllabus as "they [were] calculated to widen the
outlook and to develop those qualities of body, heart, and mind that lead to the
efficient and true fulfilment of function in life" (p. 31). It was emphasised in the
General Introduction to the 1930 Syllabus that:
By 1933, the Queensland Teachers' Journal had cause to editorialise that the
1930 Syllabus was in urgent need of a thorough overhauling (The Primary School
Syllabus, 1933, p. 1), a belief often repeated during the mid-1930s. Following a
European study tour, Director of Education McKenna (1936, p. 13) gave recognition
to the need for the syllabus to be revised. He noted that, in comparing
Queensland's requirements with those expected overseas, the syllabus, particularly
for the upper grades, demanded too high an academic standard. He doubted that
one pupil in a hundred could have passed Queensland's Scholarship Examination at
the age of 13 years (McKenna, 1936, p. 13). Chief-Inspector Edwards also
recognised the excessively high demands of the Queensland syllabus following his
visit to the United States of America in 1935. He noted that:
A study by Cunningham and Price (1934, p. 81) demonstrated that the majority
of mathematics topics were introduced at lower ages in Queensland than in any
other Australian state, as well as being below the age recommendations of the
United States Committee of Seven12. This, and the length of time spent on
174
175
Teachers should rest content mainly with teaching the rules listed in the
Syllabus and applying them to simple mechanical operations of the same rule,
stressing at all times accuracy and speed. The old type of "brain teasers"
cannot justify its place in the modern Arithmetic Syllabus. The only "problems"
176
Given these beliefs, and the apparent hesitancy in drafting a new syllabus, it is
not inconsistent that the goals for 1952 Syllabus were adopted from a dated
publication of the Board of Education in England, namely, its Handbook of
Suggestions (1937, pp. 499-500). Director-General Edwards (1951, p. 25) noted, in
his report for 1950, that the Syllabus Committee did not find any fault with the 1930
educational objectives14. As a consequence, the general introductions to the 1930
and 1952 Syllabuses were essentially identical. With respect to mathematics, these
objectives included an assertion that the role of the primary school was to "give
[children] practice in the art of calculation" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930,
p. v; 1952a, p. 1). In keeping with this belief, the 1952 Syllabus stated that the
generally accepted goals for mathematics were: (a) "To help the child to form clear
ideas about certain relations of number, time and space; (b) to make the more
useful of these ideas firm and precise in his mind through practice in the appropriate
calculations; and (c) to enable him to apply the resulting mechanical skill
intelligently, speedily and accurately in the solution of every-day problems."
(Department of Education, 1952b, p. 1)
The response to the overloading and interpretations placed on the 1930
syllabus and its amendments, by District Inspectors, Head Teachers and teachers,
constituted by the 1952 Syllabus, was therefore a re-emphasis on calculation, albeit
in context with number, time and spatial concepts, as the principal focus in the
primary grades. This occurred in conjunction with a suggested time allocation of
five hours per week15 being placed on mathematics (Department of Public
Instruction, 1952a, p. 6), the first occasion that such a specification had been made
in a Queensland syllabus. Following the introduction of the 1952 Syllabus, District
Inspector Hendy (1953, p. 2) hoped that mathematics had been deposed as the
subject that dominated the curriculum and that no longer would classes be judged
primarily on their arithmetical performances.
Although the 1964 Syllabus did not include a precise set of goals, the emphasis
on computational competency in relevant social situations remained. However, preempting the focus of subsequent syllabuses, the importance of the discovery and
understanding of mathematical principles was highlighted for the first time in a
177
Queensland mathematics syllabus. It was held that this "should prepare the child
for more advanced studies beyond the primary school" (Department of Education,
1964, p. 1), this syllabus being introduced following the abolition of the Scholarship
examination, but before discussions on the New Maths were sufficient to provide a
basis for further syllabus development.
The attempted shift from a focus on the subject to a focus on the child from
1905.
The tension between viewing arithmetic as essential knowledge for its own
sake and as knowledge that is socially useful, with the ascendancy of the
latter culminating with the 1952 Syllabus.
The advocacy for closer links between what is taught in schools and the life
of children outside the classroomthe third principle espoused in the 1904
Syllabus.
The effect on classroom practice of the ways in which children and teachers
were examined by Head Teachers and District Inspectors of Schools.
178
The effect of the methods of teacher training on the ways in which children
were taught.
These issues, although not of equal importance, are given further consideration
in subsequent sections of this chapter, the first of which focuses on the terminology
associated with the calculation of exact answers mentally during the period being
investigated.
3.3
to refer to the calculation of exact answers mentally, where the focus is on selfdeveloped strategies based on conceptual knowledge (R. E. Reys et al., 1995, p.
324), is a relatively recent one. Its use has arisen from a perceived need to
distinguish more clearly between the various aspects of mental calculation,
particularly calculating exact answers vis--vis approximate answers, as well as to
provide a distinction from the traditional approaches to teaching mental calculation.
Based on an analysis of mathematics syllabus documents, textbooks, articles in the
Queensland Education Journal, Queensland Teachers' Journal, and Education
Office Gazette, and from reports of District Inspectors of Schools, it is evident that a
number of terms were used, seemingly interchangeably, during the period 18601965. These primarily were: mental arithmetic, oral arithmetic, mental exercises,
mental, mental work, oral work, mental and oral work, and oral and mental work.
Negligible recognition was given to computational estimation in Queensland
syllabuses prior to 1966-1968.
Although the period being investigated is characterised by a lack of preciseness
in terminology, attempts were made to clarify the situation as early as 1881. Joyce
(1881), in his Handbook of School Management and Methods of Teaching16, argued
that:
179
This usage is similar in meaning to the broad definition given to mental by the Board
of Education (1937) in its Handbook of Suggestions. In the Board's view, "Mental'
Arithmetic [included] all exercises in which pen or pencil [were] not used, except
perhaps to record the answer" (Board of Education, 1937, p. 513).
For all mathematics syllabuses except those of 1952 and 1964, in which the
heading Oral Arithmetic was used for Grades II to VIII to indicate work related to
mentally calculating exact answers, little consistency in terminology within each
syllabus is evident. For example, in the Mathematics Schedule published in 1904
the following terminology was used: Mental Exercises (First Class), Mental Work
(Second Class), Mental and Oral Work (Third and Fourth Classes), Oral and Mental
Work (Fifth and Sixth Classes) (see Appendix A.7).
This schedule marked the initial use of the term oral. In a general sense, oral
referred to the explanation and discussion of arithmetic processes, as reflected in
the notes on arithmetic accompanying the 1914 Syllabus. In these it was stated
that, for the First Class (First Half-year), "the work should be exclusively oral, except
that the children should learn to know and to make the digits including 0"
(Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 62). The importance of oral questioning
had been stressed previously by District Inspector McIntyre in his 1875 report. In
decrying the "absurd habit, on the part of junior teachers, of writing down [on the
blackboard] all arithmetic exercises...ready manufactured into the shape of sums',
he advocated that "the method of dictating sums should be frequently practised"
(McIntyre, 1876, p. 30). A narrower meaning of oral, one more closely related to
mental arithmetic, is suggested by a statement in the 1904 Schedule with respect to
the Fourth Class. This required the "oral statement of processes employed in
written work of [the] class", a declaration that was omitted from the 1914 Syllabus as
it was considered to be a valuable practice for all pupils, not simply for those in the
Fourth Class17 (Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 71).
180
Following the implementation of the 1904 Schedule from January 1905, District
Inspector Shirley observed that teachers were placing an increased emphasis on
the oral explanation of problems. He noted that "it is now quite common to find
pupils able to state rules for working a problem, to make special application of the
rule to the question in hand, and to work out the steps mentally" (Shirley, 1905b, p.
117). Hence mental arithmetic, slate arithmetic and the discussion of the processes
involved were seen to be inextricably bound. However, the focus on the latter by
teachers was not widespread. District Inspector Gripp noted that, in his inspectoral
district in 1908, "oral work, particularly the explanation of the successive steps of a
solution, deserves still more practice than it is at present receiving" (Gripp, 1909, p.
60).
Although oral was initially used to highlight the need for teachers above the First
Class to encourage explanations of arithmetic processes, usage of the term in
syllabuses subsequent to that of 1904 made no apparent distinction between oral
and mental arithmetic. In the notes on arithmetic accompanying the 1914 Syllabus,
explanations of work required for each class concerning the calculation of exact
answers mentally were presented under the headings Oral Arithmetic and Oral Work
(Department of Public Instruction, 1914, pp. 64-70). This practice was continued in
later syllabuses (see Appendix A.8). For example, in the 1948 amendments, which
retained the headings used in the 1930 Syllabus and the 1938 Amendments, buying
and selling came under the heading of Mental for Grade I and Oral Work for Grade
II, whereas shopping transactions for Grade IV were outlined under Oral Arithmetic.
Oral Work for Grade VI included a list of short methods of calculation with which
children were to become familiar, reminiscent of Joyce's (1881, p. 210) reference to
mental arithmetic. The blurring of the distinction between oral and mental was also
encouraged by articles in the Queensland Teachers Journal. For example, in an
article which provided sets of examples for mental arithmetic, although the heading
was Mental Arithmetic, the subheading on the same page was Seventh grade oral
mathematics ("J.R.D., 1931, p. 9), the implication being that the set of examples
was to be presented orally, rather than by writing on the blackboard or on cards.
Although oral arithmetic did not appear as a syllabus heading until 1930, it was
used as early as 1906 by a district inspector to refer to the calculation of exact
answers mentally. Canny (1907) observed in his report that "Oral arithmetic [italics
added] is yet, as of old, mostly a failing subject" (p. 55). Nevertheless, mental
181
arithmetic was the term most commonly used by District Inspectors in their reports
prior to the introduction of the 1952 syllabus, by the authors of text books used in
Queensland classrooms, and by the writers of curriculum articles in the journals of
the Queensland Teachers' Union and in the Education Office Gazette. It therefore
seems reasonable to assume that, despite the various descriptions used in the
syllabuses from 1860 to 1965, mental arithmetic was the term habitually used by
school personnel, at least until the 1950s when oral arithmetic and mental (personal
knowledge) became the commonly used terms. This, despite the fact that the work
associated with the calculation of exact answers mentally was rarely referred to as
mental arithmetic in the various syllabuses. This occurred only for the Third and
Fourth Classes in the 1860 Schedule and for the Fifth and Sixth Classes in the 1897
and 1902 Schedules (see Appendices A.1, A.5 & A.6).
The inconsistency with which the terms were used undoubtedly contributed to
the blurring of the distinction between oral and mental arithmetic, with an attendant
loss of the intended meaning of oral work. In his report for the 1958 school year,
District Inspector Searle (1959) noted that "the lack of practice in oral [italics added]
arithmetic [that is, mental arithmetic] problems is reflected in the results in written
work of this type, which is very seldom satisfactory" (p. 14). In contrast, in his report
of the same year, District Inspector Costin (1959) suggested that there was "an
undue reduction in oral [italics added] teaching and explanation" (p. 14), a view with
which District Inspector Pyle (1959) concurred: "There [was] a tendency [for some
teachers] to resort to the old mental' types of examples rather than [use] the oral
lessons as aids to mechanical accuracy on the one hand and processes on the
other" (p. 9).
The apparent confusion in the use of these terms reflects that referred to by Hall
(1954), with respect to usage in the United Statesan issue discussed in Chapter 2.
Hall's (1954, p. 351) conclusion that many authorities attempted to avoid
controversy by using a range of terms interchangeably may also be appropriate for
the Queensland situation, at least prior to 1952. From an analysis of primary
historical sources, there appears to have been little serious discussion in
Queensland concerning the use of these terms. What did occur was largely based
on overseas debate, particularly that from the United Kingdom, the most influential
of which is likely to have been contained in Primary Education: A Report of the
Advisory Council on Education in Scotland (1949). Greenhalgh (1949b), writing in
182
3.4
proficiency with the ability to calculate mentally, despite mental arithmetic, in its
various guises, being considered an important aspect of all mathematics schedules
and syllabuses from 1860 to 1965. This may be attributed to the attitudes towards
mental arithmetic engendered by teachers. District Inspector Lidgate (1957)
observed in his 1956 report that "too many teachers...caused their pupils to dislike
Oral Arithmetic because they have treated the subject as one apart, or because they
[have made] the examples too difficult" (p. 8). Such practices can, at least in part,
183
be ascribed to the roles designated for mental arithmetic during this period. Mental
arithmetic was seen to provide:
1.
2.
3.
Although the first two roles have an enduring validity, little concern for mental
arithmetic as a means for developing a deeper understanding of the structure of
numbers and their properties was evident. In contrast, such an outcome is essential
to the current vision for mental computation (R. E. Reys, 1984, p. 549). Reflecting a
utilitarian view of mental arithmetic, Cowham (1895) suggested that:
[Mental arithmetic] is of high value during the acquisition of a new rule, and is
not less valuable in the practical application of any rule to calculations of everyday life. The scholar who has had large experience in mental calculations
acquires thereby a facility in dealing with numbers which no amount of slatework can yield. (p. 169)
184
particularly prior to 1905 while the Department of Public Instruction was dominated
by Under Secretary Anderson and General Inspector Ewart, both of whom were
strong proponents of formal discipline. In directing that the teaching methods used
by teachers at the Central School in Brisbane were to provide the prototypes for all
other vested schools, it was stated in the Regulations for the Establishment and
Management of Primary Schools (1861) that "these methods...have for their object,
not the mere cramming of a child's memory, but the training and development of his
intellectual faculties" (p. 84). Hence, the primary school teacher was expected to
teach his pupils to think, with a minimal reliance on learning by rote, albeit in context
with providing exercises to strengthen the child's mind.
Despite such beliefs, none of the syllabus documents, nor accompanying notes,
made reference to this aspect of the role of mental arithmetic (see Appendix A).
Additionally, the theory of formal discipline was discredited early this century. This
was recognised by District Inspector Baker (1929) who stressed "that facility
acquired in any particular form of intellectual exercise produces a general
competence in all exercises that involve the same faculty is no longer accepted" (p.
273). Nonetheless, the belief in the value of mental gymnastics persisted to such an
extent that, although not referring to mental arithmetic specifically, the Syllabus
Committee overseeing the 1948 Amendments to the mathematics syllabus saw the
need to assert that teachers "should be instructed that all school-subjects should
now be approached from the stand-point of realism and practical utility and that the
old idea of including subjects to train the muscles of the mind' [was] now
discredited" (Mathematics Subcommittee, 1947, p. 1).
185
186
XIV of the 1904 Regulations of the Department of Public Instruction stated that
"mental calculations should be the basis of all the instruction, and [that] the pupils
should be made familiar by mental exercises with the principles underlying every
process before the written work is undertaken" (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 200). It
was stressed to District Inspectors that "the value of mental arithmetic in
familiarizing the pupils with the principles of new rules cannot be too strongly
insisted upon" (Circular to District Inspectors, 1904, p. 1).
This belief was a theme flowing through each syllabus from 1904 to 1964. The
1930 Syllabus, for example, stated that "the teacher should introduce...new [rules]
through appropriate and simple mental exercises devised by himself, not simply
extracted from available textbooks (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 31).
However, only occasionally did District Inspectors comment favourably on the
effective use of this approach by teachersfor example, Pyle (1954, p. 2). Annual
reports were used regularly to reemphasise their belief in the importance of using
mental arithmetic as preliminary to written methods. Representative of these were
the comments of Bevington (1925, p. 83), Fewtrell (1914, p. 70), and Lidgate (1953)
who asserted, "If children are sound at oral arithmetic there will be little to fear with
written arithmetic" (p. 2). Such comments suggest that the use of mental arithmetic
as an introduction to written work was not widely practised by Queensland teachers,
even though it seems reasonable to assume that issues highlighted in their annual
reports were ones that District Inspectors would have emphasised during their
inspections of State schools. Factors which may have contributed to the
development of this mismatch between the recommended teaching practices and
their implementation are analysed later in this chapter, particularly those factors
which influenced the teaching processfor example, large classes, poor teacher
education, the inspectorial and examination systems.
Echoing Ross's 1885 comment referred to previously, District Inspector Farrell,
in 1929, noted that:
187
Many teachers [were] slow to realize that the main use of oral arithmetic is to
teach the various mathematics processes, and thus it becomes a lead-in to all
written arithmetic. Oral arithmetic is a most valuable teaching medium, whereas
it [was] too often confined to testing. Graded teaching exercises should be first
used and, when the processes taught have been mastered, miscellaneous
exercises based on the processes taught should be given to consolidate the
work taught. (p. 3)
188
189
190
191
which had occurred following the discrediting of the theory of formal discipline some
twenty years previously.
A concern for the social usefulness of mental arithmetic was declared within the
wider context of the usefulness of arithmetic generally in the after-life of children, a
view expressed by Cox and MacDonald (n.d., p. 180), and Gladman (n.d., p. 72).
Both the 1914 and 1930 Syllabuses suggested that "the very practical purposes that
mathematical work has to serve in the child's future life should regulate the
character of its treatment in school" (Department of Education, 1914, p. 60; 1930, p.
30). It was suggested, in part, that "the teaching of...[arithmetic] should aim...at
imparting facility in the working of concrete examples dealing with matters pertaining
to the everyday life of the pupil" (Department of Education, 1914, p. 60; 1930, p. 30).
However, these syllabuses also assisted in perpetuating the belief in the
disciplinary powers of arithmetic by stating that another aim of teaching arithmetic
was to "[develop] the intelligence" (Department of Education, 1914, p. 60; 1930, p.
30). This aim, although increasingly open to question, was not inconsistent with
such beliefs as those expressed by Macgroarty (1886) in his 1885 report, who,
although recognising arithmetic's social utility, was also concerned with its
disciplinary powers:
Arithmetic, which comes into play in the ordinary transactions of business life, is
of very great importance in its practical bearings, but the part it takes in
developing the pupil's intellectual and reasoning faculties, when properly and
intelligently taught, is hardly of less importance. (p. 63)
192
improves the tenacity of the mind, strengthens the memory, cultivates the power of
abstraction, and tends to promote clearness of conception....It developes [sic] such
moral qualities as patience, readiness, activity, and presence of mind" (Wilkins,
1886, p. 40). Further,
193
will soon prove capable of any amount of labour upon other tasks as well. (p.
178)
Although a similar view was taken by Park (1879, p. 43) and Gladman (1904, p.
200), they did not propose that children should operate with numbers as large as
those suggested by Robinson (1882, p. 178), a recommendation in keeping with the
Queensland mathematics schedules of that time. Park (1879, p. 43) advocated that,
once a class had a fairly intelligent grasp of an operation, a few questions should be
framed for the children to work mentally, with such questions being related to the
business of commercial and every-day life. Under the 1904 Schedule, where a
focus was on the application of mathematical principles, mental arithmetic ideally
should have discarded large numbers, and consisted of exercises which did not
require any great mechanical working, so much as an intelligent grasp of principles
(Mental Arithmetic: A Few Suggestions, 1910, p. 176).
Many colonial teachers, however, went beyond the requirements of the
schedules. In their hands "mental arithmetic consisted principally in working certain
hard numbers in the shortest time by the shortest method" (Mental Arithmetic: A
Few Suggestions, 1910, p. 176). Nonetheless, Burns (1973, p. 4) questions
whether such teachers fully implemented their espoused beliefs in the use of
arithmetic to, in the words of one Queensland State school teacher, "help sharpen
the wits and strengthen the mind's grasp" (Scientific and Useful, 1882, p. 301).
The latter was a view in accordance with that held by Ewart (1890) who stated, in
his report for 1889, that from the "intelligent teaching [of arithmetic accrues] the
intellectual gymnastics necessary for bracing the mind to logical and continuous
thought" (p. 67). Burns (1973) suggested that:
Despite their apparent lip service to the aim of mental discipline and to its basis
in faculty psychology the practices of many colonial teachers implied a different
kind of aim from the one ostensibly guiding their teaching. The real aim of most
teachers centred on the inculcation and retention of information and if they
concerned themselves at all with faculty development then it was almost
exclusively with the faculty of memory. (p. 4)
194
Although research had cast doubt on the validity of formal discipline and the
concomitant theory of transfer of training, beliefs in these theories persisted well into
the twentieth century in Queensland (Kemp, 1944, p. 29; Schonell, cited in
Teachers and the Syllabus, 1949, p. 1), albeit in a modified form. Greenhalgh
(1949a, p. 3) made use of Bassett's (1949) arguments in a further attempt to
convince Queensland teachers to forgo their conservatism in the late 1940s.
Bassett (1949, p. 110) had argued that the fall-back position of the proponents of
formal discipline, which held that mental arithmetic, in the form in which it had been
taught, had a special disciplinary value, was also questioned by research evidence.
Prior to this, in 1947, Greenhalgh had asked:
Only in the United States of America did educators take cognisance of these
experimental findings ("X+Y=Z, 1945, p. 14), the most influential of which were
those of Thorndike obtained during the first quarter of the twentieth century (Kemp,
1944, p. 31). These findings were accepted to such a degree that mental arithmetic
ceased to be an essential part of the primary curriculum (Reys & Barger, 1994, p.
33). However, with the discrediting of formal discipline, many psychologists and
educators assumed that transfer of training and mental discipline had also been
discredited. "The mind could not be trained in general'. [Hence] whatever was to
be learned had to be taught specifically, and the only things worth teaching were
those for which there was some obvious and immediate use" (Kolesnik, 1958, p. 5).
To use Greenhalgh's (1947, p. 11) term, the predominant educational philosophy in
the 1930s and 1940s was realism. The only "justification [for] the inclusion of any
subject rests in its usefulness to the child, the child as he now is and the man he is
to be" (Greenhalgh, 1947, p. 11), a belief that permeated the 1948 Amendments
and the 1952 Syllabus.
From his 1901 study, Thorndike concluded that "it [was] misleading to speak in
terms of sense discrimination, attention, memory, observations and quickness, since
195
what these words refer to are multitudinous, separate, individual functions' which
may have very little in common" (Kolesnik, 1958, p. 33). Chief-Inspector Edwards
(1936), reporting to Queensland teachers following his visit to the United States of
America, indicated that "the Progressivist does not believe that there is any such
thing as general mental training. Mental benefit is specific. The results obtained
from one subject cannot be transferred to any other subject" (p. 16).
Prior to the work of Thorndike, belief in the tenets of formal discipline and faculty
psychology were shaken by the advocates of Herbartian psychology (Ballard,
1928a, p. 3). Johann Herbart, a German philosopher, "contemptuously [cast] aside
the doctrine of inborn faculties or capacities for acquiring knowledge" (Fennell,
1902, p. v) when he declared, as cited by Kolesnik (1958), that those who "cherish
the obsolete opinion that there resides in the human soul such certain powers or
faculties which have to be trained have no psychological insight" (p. 24). The
Herbartian, therefore, did not set out to train or exercise the mind, but rather aimed
to present new information in a form that could be selected and assimilated with the
old (Fennell, 1902, p. v). Herbart asserted that masses of ideas needed to be
trained, not abstract powers or faculties.
The continued belief by Queensland teachers in aspects of formal discipline,
faculty psychology and transfer of training was attributable, in Burns' (1973, p. 4)
view, to the teacher training received under the pupil-teacher system which tended
to perpetuate the traditional beliefs and practices espoused by senior teachers, and
to the system of examinations and inspections which placed a premium on
knowledge and learning by rote. Hence the concern was for developing the
memory, as Burns (1973, p. 4) has suggested. That teachers and District
Inspectors retained a belief in the role of arithmetic, in general, and mental
arithmetic, in particular, as a means for quickening the intelligence, developing
judgement, improving reasoning (Baker, 1929, p. 281; Bevington, 1923, p. 64;
Mutch, 1924, p. 40) and the "power of concentrating the mind upon the solution of a
problem" (Martin, 1916, p. 135), may also be ascribed to their beliefs about the
nature of mathematics. Cox and MacDonald (n.d.), the recommended text on
school management from 1912, asserted that:
196
capable of demonstration, and each new truth is seen to grow out of what has
preceded. Thus the child is trained to investigate, to think in logical sequence,
and to advance step by step along a chain of reasoning, until the desired truth is
demonstrated. In this process the child learns the value of methodical
arrangement and clearness of statement; he is taught to discern the essential
from the non-essential, and to seize on that which is useful for his purpose; he
is trained to habits of close attention and fixity of purpose, knowing no rest till
the end is attained. Each successful effort tends to make him more and more
conscious of his powers, and implants a spirit of self-reliance and perseverance.
(pp. 180-181)
Ballard (1928a, p. xi) pointed out that this English view of arithmetic represented
arithmetic as logic, whereas the American view was that of arithmetic as habit, a
view based primarily on Thorndike's (1922) associationist beliefs about how
arithmetic should be taught. However, it is the English view that was most influential
on Queensland mathematics education beliefs and practices (Clements, Grimison, &
Ellerton, 1989, p. 51; Schildt, Reithmuller, & Searle, n.d., p. 8). Arithmetic as logic
was also espoused by Gladman (n.d.): "Mathematics are studied, not so much for
the practical worth of their facts as for the logical processes through which the mind
must pass in learning them" (p. 73). Cox and MacDonald (n.d., p. 217) argued that
problems worked mentally share the same disciplinary value as those worked with
paper and pencil, but have the advantage of being worked quickly. Hence mental
arithmetic was judged to be the means for training children to think and to reason.
"Intelligence in Arithmetic should be secured through the medium of mental
exercises...taken for a few minutes at the commencement of [each] arithmetic
lesson" (Bevington, 1925, p. 83). Accuracy in thinking and reasoning was
paramount, as was accuracy in each step taken in working towards a solution
(Martin, 1920a, p. 81).
Following the implementation of the 1904 Schedule, with its emphasis on the
correlation of subjects and the self-activity of the pupils, Mutch (1907) commented
that "now teachers regard arithmetic not only as a practical art, but also as an
excellent means of intellectual discipline....With...more stress laid on oral arithmetic,
there has been a distinct gain in thinking power" (p. 70). It is possible that Mutch
was reflecting a modified view of mental discipline, one that discounted the beliefs in
197
direct transfer of training and in faculties of the mind, as defined by the proponents
of faculty psychology. This revised view of mental discipline held that a study of
arithmetic, including mental arithmetic, enhances concentration and the ability to
think critically:
3.5
the period under investigation, cognisance needs to be taken of issues beyond the
background issues related to syllabus development and implementation, and the
roles of mental arithmetic discussed previously. Aspects which need to be analysed
are: (a) the various interpretations placed on the term mental arithmetic, (b) the
nature of mental arithmetic as embodied in the syllabus documents, and (c) the
characteristics of mental arithmetic as implemented, given that the nature of mental
arithmetic as reflected in the learning experiences of children, does not necessarily
mirror syllabus content nor the recommended ways in which skill with mental
calculation should be taught.
[One who] can perform mentally, with readiness, and with little danger of error,
all those innumerable short computations that are met with in everyday life;
198
and...who can execute on paper all sorts of elementary calculations, even when
considerably extended with rapidity and certainty. (p. 203)
In keeping with this view, Ross (1905) suggested that "the desiderata of mental
arithmetic are speed' and accuracy'" (p. 33). Additionally, the introduction to a
mental arithmetic textbook20 commonly used by Queensland teachers early in the
twentieth century highlighted that mental arithmetic questions should exercise the
mind of the child so as to encourage dexterity with numbers ("An Inspector of
Schools, 1914, p. 3). This consideration alludes to current beliefs about mental
computation, which stress a need for children to be able to perform mental
calculations with nonstandard strategies by taking advantage of an ability to
compose and decompose numbers (Resnick, 1989b, p. 36; Sowder, 1992, p. 4).
Although little recognition was given in the various schedules and syllabuses to
the need for children to be encouraged to invent short methods for themselves, as
advocated by Joyce (1881, p. 215), such was occasionally given, in an ad hoc
manner, by articles in the Queensland Teachers' Journal and The Education Office
Gazette, and by District Inspectors. In Teaching Hints: Arithmetic (1908), it was
stated that "the teacher [should] have no difficulty in devising questions in mental
arithmetic which are easy by special methods but too difficult for mental work by
ordinary rules" (p. 16). In providing advice to teachers, District Inspector Bevington
(1925) did not necessarily interpret all short cuts as being based on the rote
application of rulesthat is, on instrumental understanding, as defined in Chapter 2.
Bevington (1925, p. 83) advocated the use of a compensatory approach (see Table
2.4) for examples such as 99 + 87 and 100 books at 19s 11d.
A similar approach was recommended by District Inspector Kennedy (1903) for
mentally calculating the cost of 24 articles at 19s.11d. eachby taking 24 pence
from 24 pounds. Nevertheless, he did consider that his example was "a
suppositious and extreme one" (p. 69), when placed in context with the usual
method of calculating such examples using aliquot parts. A more detailed outline of
flexible approaches to mental addition and subtraction was presented by Cox and
MacDonald (n.d., p. 224). A range of work from the left strategies (see Table 2.4)
was advocated for addition: For example, 25 + 37 = 2 tens + 3 tens = 5 tens 5; 5
tens 5 + 7 = 6 tens 2 = 62. For subtraction, a decomposition strategy (see Table
199
2.4) was the approach suggested. It was pointed out that 45 - 18, for example,
could be calculated as 45 - 10 = 35; 35 - 8 = 27 (Cox & MacDonald, n.d., p. 231).
However, such advocacies for flexibility were counteracted not only by an
emphasis on the application of the written methods of computation, but also by such
rigid views, with respect to process, as those expressed in Mental Arithmetic: A Few
Suggestions (1910):
Great stress should be paid to the correct method of obtaining answers. When
asked how the first answer (12) is obtained [for "A boy has 18 apples. Gives
away 6. Shares equally between 4 boys. How many each?"] such an answer
as 12 and 6 make 18 is incorrect. The child must see that from 18 six has been
subtracted. The rest of the sum should be solved by the use of correct
operationsi.e., 12 is divided by 4, not that 4 x 3 = 12. This is important. (p. 176)
200
used in written arithmetic should be the ones applied orally (Department of Public
Instruction, 1952b, p. 2).
Robinson (1882), in advocating that mental arithmetic was simply a collection of
rules, suggested that mental arithmetic was "not so much opposed to slate
arithmetic as to mechanical arithmetic, though it is opposed to both" (p. 177).
Computations were considered to be mechanical when a class of questions was
solved using one fixed rule. Such an approach reduced the practical application of
mental arithmetic as the rules were easily forgotten (Robinson, 1882, p. 177). In
contrast,
Others, during the era under investigation, took a more simplistic view of mental
arithmetic. Lidgate (1954) suggested that "oral arithmetic [would] improve if children
[were] induced to realise that it is merely the application of tables" (p. 2). Whereas
this may be true for children in lower grades, as was asserted by Joyce (1881, p.
210) and in the notes accompanying the 1914 Syllabus (Department of Public
Instruction, 1914, p. 64), for example, the beliefs of Robinson (1882, pp. 178-179)
suggest that mental arithmetic involves much more than the mere application of
tables. Such beliefs are consistent with the characteristics of mental computation
discussed in Chapter 2.
Nonetheless, Queensland teachers appear to have consistently taken a narrow
view of mental arithmetic, a view that cannot be fully explained merely by reference
to the apparent on-going belief in aspects of the theory of formal discipline.
Essential to this analysis is a consideration of more general factors that impinged on
teacher beliefs and practices. These include: (a) the beliefs about mental arithmetic
embodied in the syllabuses, (b) the influence of the systems of examination and
inspection, (c) the level of teacher training, and (d) the size and structure of classes
taught.
201
202
V, 1876, pp. 825-826) was narrower in scope than that in the 1860 Schedule. This
restriction was designed to prevent a clash between the curriculum offered by the
free primary schools and that of the Grammar Schools (Lawry, 1975, p. 59).
Schedule V presented a Table of the Minimum Amount of Attainments Required
From Pupils for Admission Into Each Class in Primary Schools (Schedule V, 1876,
p. 825) (see Appendix A.2). General Inspector Anderson noted in his report for
1876 that the publication of the standards of attainments ensured "that no teacher
who [read the schedule] ...carefully [could] unintentionally commit the grave fault of
promoting his scholars prematurely" (Anderson, 1877, p. 21). The implementation
of this table was clarified in a revision to Schedule V published in 1885. It explained
that "the work to be gone through in any class (the Fifth Class excepted) [was to] be
found detailed in the column with the name of the class next above it" (Schedule V,
1885, p. 490).
With respect to mental arithmetic, the changes contained in the 1876 Schedule
set more realistic goals for each class than those embodied in that of 1860.
Children were required "to perform mentally easy operations in the simple rules"for
addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, by the end of the Upper Second
Class. In the First Class, instead of being required to master all four operations with
results to 30, children were required under the 1876 Schedule "to perform mental
addition up to a result not higher than thirty. Subtraction was included for the
Lower Second Class (Schedule V, 1876, p. 825). Although no specific reference
was given to the rules of mental arithmetic in the 1876 Schedule, among the
arithmetic texts furnished to schools (List of Books, 1880, p. 23) were ones that
contained expositions of these rulesfor example, that presented in Colenso's
(1874) A Shilling Arithmetic. The importance for children to be able to calculate
mentally in a range of contexts beyond whole numbers and money was also
recognised in the 1876 Schedule. Work for the Third and Fourth Classes, and by
implication for the Fifth Class, included easy mental operations in the "compound
rules and reduction, including bills of parcels, rectangular areas, ...proportion,
practice, vulgar fractions and simple interest, including miscellaneous problems"22
(Schedule V, 1876, p. 825) (see Appendix A.2).
By the 1890s almost all children in Queensland were receiving some primary
education, albeit to a standard "hardly appropriate for a developing urban society"
(Lawson, 1970, p. 215). However, the compulsory attendance provision of the
203
Education Act of 1875 could not be enforced until the early 1900s as attendance
was irregular, and education was not held in high regard. It was Hanger's (1963)
view that:
More than sixty per cent of parents of 1890 were suspicious of education for
their children or hostile to it: they regarded it as useless and teachers as a
nuisance, and felt that the sooner the children were at work and helping to
support the home, the better for themselves and none the worse for the
children. (p. 89)
With the publication of a revised schedule (Para 143, 1891, pp. 23-24),
effective from January 1892, school head teachers gained additional guidance for
the placement of children into classes. Not only were the six classes redesignated
as First Class to Sixth Class, with a specified duration for each, but also the
schedule was restructured to include the expected standard of proficiency for each
class (Para 144, 1891, pp. 24-28) (see Appendix A.3). The main changes in
mathematics concerned the extension into elementary geometry for boys, whereas
girls were to devote more time to needlework (Lawry, 1968, p. 583). The standards
of proficiency provided greater guidance for the treatment of the various aspects of
arithmetic in each class. The work was delineated for each half-year of enrolment
and provided a sequence for introducing particular learnings. For example, children
in First Class were required "to add mentally numbers applied to objects to a result
not greater than 10" during the first half-year, to 20 during the second six months, to
30 during the third half-year and "to a result not greater than 40" by the end of the
fourth half-year (Para 144, 1891, pp. 24-25).
Nonetheless, few changes were made to mental arithmetic. As previously,
children were expected "to perform mentally operations in [the four] rules" by the
end the second class with the standards of proficiency for the third half-year
indicating mental addition and subtraction of money to one pound (Para 144, 1891,
p. 25). Mental subtraction was to be introduced during the third half-year of First
Class, so that by the end of that grade children were required "to add mentally
numbers to a result not greater than 40; [and] to lessen mentally any number of two
figures by any number of one digit" (Para 144, 1891, p. 25). Mental work for the
Third Class included shopping transactions based on measurement tables and easy
204
bills of parcel, as well as the application of the dozen and score rules. Mental
arithmetic in the Fourth and Fifth classes was extended to include the unitary
method23, decimals, percentages, and square and cube roots (see Appendix A.3).
Although some changes to the syllabus were introduced in 1894, 1897 and
1902, their minor nature induced Senior District Inspector Platt (1905) to observe in
his report for 1904 that "the course of instruction in our schools has been practically
the same for the last thirteen yearsthat is, since 1st January, 1892" (p. 30).
Although Platt was referring to the syllabus as a whole, his comments were
particularly relevant to mental arithmetic. In 1894, minor changes were made to the
standards for the First Class due to its length being reduced from two to 1 years
(see Appendix A.4): The end-of-class expectations remained the same, but the size
of the numbers to be manipulated in the each half-year were increasedto 20, 30
and 40 for each of the three half-years, respectively (Schedule VI, 1894, p. 321).
The State Education Act Amendment Act of 1897, effective from 1 July 1898,
not only introduced algebra and Euclid to the Fifth and Sixth Classes, but also
extended the First Class course to two years and reduced its requirements (see
Appendix A.5) to lessen "the field of work in schools taught by one teacher"
(Dalrymple, 1899, p. 5), an outcome of which Macgroarty (1900, p. 63) was not
convinced. Mental arithmetic for the first class focussed on developing the ability "to
add mentally numbers of one figure to a result not greater than fifty" (Schedule V,
1897, p. 798). During the Second Class the ability to mentally subtract, multiply and
divide with abstract numbers was to be developed. Additionally, mental operations
with the weights and measures considered to be of more use were designated for
the Fourth, rather than the Third Class.
The 1902 revised schedule (Schedule XIV, 1902, pp. 169-170), the first to
provide an indication of the expected age ranges of children in each of the classes,
did not introduce any explicit changes to mental arithmetic (see Appendix A.6). As
in the 1897 Schedule V, Schedule XIV (1902) and Schedule XV (1902), the latter
presenting the standards of proficiency, did not specifically specify the mental
arithmetic for the Fifth and Sixth Classes. For example, the arithmetic for the third
half-year of enrolment in the Sixth Class was listed as: "Commercial arithmetic;
mensurationLongmans' Chapters I to XI.; mental arithmetic" (Schedule XV, 1902,
p. 173).
205
However, some insights may be gained from the textbooks used in conjunction
with the 1897 and 1902 schedules. The mental arithmetic text supplied to schools
for the instruction of pupils was The Practical Mental Arithmetic, an English
publication written by "An Inspector of Schools" (1914). One of the four arithmetic
texts was A Shilling Arithmetic by Pendlebury and Beard, first published in 1899
(Appendix B, 1902, p. 95). This text contained a section devoted to the mental
rules for "the calculation of prices" (Pendlebury & Beard, 1899, pp. 174-175), which
constituted the only reference to mental arithmetic within the text. Unlike A Shilling
Arithmetic, which was arranged by topics, The Practical Mental Arithmetic was
organised into sets of questions for each of the classes in the schools in England
(Standards I to VII). It included the advice that teachers should consider the work
for Standards V to VII together, given that the numbers of children in upper
standards were usually small24 ("An Inspector of Schools, 1914, p. 103). The 195
questions for Standard V and the 160 for Standards VI and VII were relevant to the
work set for the Fifth and Sixth Classes in Queensland schools in the 1897 and
1902 schedules, given their focus on vulgar and decimal fractions, percentages and
proportion, in context with money, weights and measures.
In implementing the prescribed course of instruction for each class there is
evidence to suggest that teachers interpreted the order in which the learnings were
presented in the schedule as the order in which they were to be taught. This may
help to explain why mental arithmetic, "except in a few rare cases, [gave] poor
results" (Radcliffe, 1898, p. 73), an observation typical of those made by District
Inspectors during the period under investigation. In an analysis of the reports for
1897 in the Queensland Education Journal, it was noted that the schedule
"[prescribed] mental arithmetic last in the order of the arithmetic work, [whereas] it
ought to [have been]...first" (District Inspectors' Reports for 1897, 1898, p. 6). It
was also observed that Radcliffe "[had] put his finger on the key to the [poor results].
He [suggested that] the teaching of arithmetic [should be based] on a thorough
mental grasp of simple operations in the rules" (District Inspectors' Reports for
1897, 1898, p. 6), an affirmation of the importance of mental arithmetic as initiatory
to written work.
In accordance with this belief, stated officially for the first time in the preface to
the 1904 Schedule (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 201), the mental work for each class
was listed separately and prior to the listing of the written work in mathematics for
206
Classes 2 to 6. Although the mental work remained essentially the same for each
class as that in the previous schedule, the presentation of the mental and oral work
reflected beliefs about how mathematics should be taught (see Appendix A.7).
Teachers were encouraged to take every opportunity to allow for the self-activity of
the pupils, thus allowing them to interact with actual objects and to measure
quantities using various unitssticks, bundles, tens, dozens, feet, pence, ounces
(Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 201).
The mental work for the Second Class, for example, included "concrete
exercises involving the four simple operations, and falling within the range of the
pupils' experience" (Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 206), a child-centred focus for the
operations dealt with in Second Class under previous schedules. However, the
syllabus for this class became more exacting with the inclusion of money tables,
previously in Third Class, and halves, fourths, and eighths of an inch which were
previously taught in Fourth Class. Proportion, however, was moved from Fourth
Class to the Fifth Class during which cubic measure, previously a Sixth Class
requirement, was also to be taught. Ratio was specifically included for the first time
in a schedule, as a topic for the Fourth Class (see Appendix A.7).
The syllabus which came into force from January 1915 was the first to be
published as a separate document, and the first to include detailed notes on the
teaching of mathematics delineated for each grade. In was noted in the preface to
this syllabus that the changes in the spirit of teaching, which were associated with
the 1904 Syllabus, "were so extensive that some years of practical experience as to
its working were required by teachers and inspectors before its full advantages
could be reaped or its deficiencies detected" (Department of Public Instruction,
1914, p. 5). As the departmental view of the 1904 Syllabus was that it was a "good
Syllabus" (Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 5), and one that was an
improvement on previous schedules, drastic changes were not made to the syllabus
in its 1914 form. With respect to mental arithmetic, no changes were made to the
requirements for the mental and oral work for any of the six primary classes (see
Appendix A.8).
In association with the introduction of the 1930 Syllabus, classes were
reclassified into seven yearly grades preceded by a preparatory grade of 1 years
for children enrolled in July, the time for enrolment considered most appropriate for
those born in the first half or early in the second half of the year (Department of
207
Public Instruction, 1930, p. x). It was expected that most children would enter Grade
II at approximately 7 years of age, an age comparable to that for the Second Class
under the 1914 Syllabus. Grades VI and VII, Forms I and II, respectively, of the
Intermediate Schools, were designed to cater for the interests, capacities and
attitudes of the over-twelves, with a study of algebra and geometry intended to
provide an opportunity for determining those children who would benefit from a high
school education (Greenhalgh, 1957, p. 75). The syllabus recognised, however,
that many children would not receive a secondary education. It was stated that "it is
generally agreed that the Primary School [is] the only school that some children will
know" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. v). The changes embodied in the
1930 Syllabus were formulated to:
Fulfil the demands for foundation work, [to apply] school Arithmetic to the
solution of problems connected with ordinary business transactions and
operations with numbers and quantities within the children's experience, and to
give more definitely the standards required in the different grades of the course.
(Farrell, 1929, p. 291)
The importance of mental and oral work was stressed in the belief that such
work had a definite place on the daily time-table and was the means by which new
work would be introduced (Farrell, 1929, pp. 294-295). Although major changes
were made to the written work25, the spiral nature of the 1930 Syllabus resulted in
the mental work under this syllabus being essentially the same as that for the 1914
Syllabus (see Appendix A.8), when allowances were made for the restructuring of
classes (New Syllabus, 1929, pp. 460-462). "A new rule [was to be] introduced in
one grade by means of mental exercises followed by easy mechanical exercises
and easy problems in the next grade, and by harder mechanical work and problems
in the succeeding grade" (Farrell, 1929, p. 292). For example, the mental and oral
work with vulgar fractions in Grades I to III were followed in Grade IV by written work
involving "simple exercises in finding fractional parts of quantities or numbers, and
in Grade V by the addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of vulgar fractions
(Department of Public Instruction, 1930, pp. 34, 35, 37, 39, 41).
In combination with the syllabus notes, which were set out in columns opposite
the requirements for each grade, the mental work in the 1930 Syllabus was
208
209
in buying, selling and giving change were limited to 1s. in Grade I, and 1 in Grades
II and III. This contrasts with "exercises in domestic accounts and simple business
transactions" for the Third Class under the 1914 Syllabus (Department of Public
Instruction, 1914, p. 17), the first two terms of which equated with Grade III from
1930. From Grade IV, however, the requirements were not expressed so precisely,
with work for this class being delineated as "mental exercises based on the
compound rules, including household and shopping transactions familiar to the
pupils" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 39). Such wording opened the
1930 Syllabus to criticisms similar to those of the 1914 Syllabus, which centred on
its being "too vague and open to many constructions, even by common-sense
persons" (Arithmetic, 1927, p. 17), with the result that there were always wide
differences of opinion particularly regarding standards in mental work ("J.R.D.,
1931, p. 9).
The inappropriate interpretations placed on the 1930 Syllabus, together with
complaints of its being overloaded, resulted in amendments being introduced,
initially in 1938, and subsequently in 1948, as previously noted. Edwards (1938a, p.
2) pointed out that the 1938 amendments were more extensive for mathematics
than for other subjects within the primary school curriculum. Many of the changes
affected mental arithmetic, particularly that for the lower school where "greater
stress than formerly [was]...placed...on the mental and oral Arithmetic prescribed"
(Edwards, 1938a, p. 2). Whereas no specific reference was made to mental
arithmetic for the Preparatory Grade in the 1930 Syllabus, limits were placed on the
mental exercises for the preparatory grades26 under the 1938 amendments (see
Appendix A.10). These exercises, including easy problems, were limited to
numbers to 10 for Preparatory 1 and 2, to 19 for Preparatory 3 and to 99 for the
fourth preparatory grade (Department of Public Instruction, 1938, pp. 10-12).
Although some changes reduced the difficulty of the work to be undertaken,
others centred on re-allocating requirements to higher grades as a consequence of
changes to the written work, in context with the spiral nature of the syllabus. The
difficulty of fraction work for young children was given some recognition by
restricting a study of vulgar fractions in Grade I to one-half and one-quarter of
numbers and quantities. Additionally "resolving easy numbers such as 24 and 36 to
prime factors as preparation for the work in fractions and cancelling" was moved
from Grade III to Grade IV (Department of Public Instruction, 1938, p. 15),
210
concomitant with the work in vulgar fractions for Grade V altered to include "the four
simple rules with easy practical application to concrete quantities" (Department of
Public Instruction, 1938, p. 16). Similarly, expressing ratios as fractions and
decimals, and simple proportion were moved from Grade V to Grade VI. As a
consequence, Grade VI children were also required to undertake preparatory
exercises to simple proportion which entailed expressing ratios of measures as
vulgar and decimal fractionsfor example, "1 rood to 1 acre = or .25" (Department
of Public Instruction, 1938, p. 17).
Even though the 1938 amendments were considered to be "better adapted to
the mental ages of the children" (Edwards, 1939, p. 31), teachers continued to
advocate for further reductions in the requirements, as hitherto discussed. The
amendments introduced in January 1948 were designed to "give some relief where
such [was] necessary [and were to]...remain in force until a projected New Syllabus
[had] been drawn up" (Department of Public Instruction, 1948, p. 1), a project that
was not completed until 1952. With respect to mental arithmetic, the most
substantial reduction in requirements related to the preparatory grades (see
Appendix A.11). Mental exercises in addition and subtraction, with easy problems,
were limited to numbers to eight in Preparatory 2, to 13 in Preparatory 3 and to 19 in
Preparatory 4. For the latter, mental exercises related to counting in ones and twos
were restricted to 19, in contrast to counting in ones, twos, fives, and tens to 100
under the 1938 amendments. Halving and doubling were also reduced from
numbers to 100 to numbers to 18, with the former limit being moved to Grade I (see
Appendix A.11). Multiplication and division of whole numbers within the pupils'
range, and finding halves and quarters of numbers and quantities became part of
the oral work for Grade II, rather than for Grade I (Department of Public Instruction,
1948, pp. 5-7).
During the discussions, initiated by District Inspectors of Schools during the
mid- to late-1940s, concerning proposed syllabus amendments, the requirements for
short methods of calculation were frequently discussed, although it is apparent that
unanimity of opinion was not achieved. Based on recommendations to the Syllabus
Committee (Mathematics Subcommittee of Syllabus Committee, 1947, p. 1), a
number of short methods of calculation were specified for Grades VI and VII. In
addition to the dozens and scores rules stipulated in the 1930 Syllabus, from 1948
children were also expected to apply the rules for: (a) finding the value of 240 and
211
480 articles27, (b) calculating using the aliquot parts of one pound, (c) finding the
squares of numbers with and of those ending in 5, (d) dividing and multiplying by
25, and (e) finding the differences between pairs of square numbers (Department of
Public Instruction, 1948, p. 18). It had been recommended to the Syllabus
Committee that calculating the value of 960 articles, finding the square root by
factors and determining the difference between two squares should be deleted from
the prepared list (Mathematics Subcommittee of Syllabus Committee, 1947, p. 1).
That the deletion of the scores, 240, 480 and 960 rules was also recommended by
some teachers (McCormack, 1947, p. 1) suggests that short methods of calculation
was an area of mathematics that exceeded the intent of the 1930 Syllabus and its
1938 amendments in their implementation.
In association with the introduction of the 1952 Syllabus, changes were made to
the classification of children to more closely align the structure of primary school
classes with those of the other Australian states. The classes were restructured into
Grades I to VIII preceded by a Preparatory Grade28 of one year, the purpose of
which was to "be a real preparatory or settling-in grade" (Devries, 1951, p. 10).
Focussing on kindergarten methods, this grade was designed to provide children
with informal experiences in reading and number. Consequently, mental arithmetic
was not specifically mentioned in the requirements for the Preparatory Grade in the
1952 Syllabus.
The changes embodied in the 1948 amendments and in the 1952 mathematics
syllabus aimed "at developing skill in those calculations which men and women
have to make in daily life...[so that] children should come to see in [mathematics]
one of the indispensable tools used in all crafts and trades" (Department of Public
Instruction, 1948b, p. 17). Although additional assistance, through the notes
accompanying the content for each grade, was given to teachers concerning how
the various requirements were to be taught, few substantial alterations were made
to the syllabus from that presented in the 1948 amendments (Dagg, 1971, p. 33).
Those that were made centred on a further reduction of the level of difficulty of
the mathematics for particular grades. Although the children entering Grade I in
1952 were of a comparable age to those of previous years, the oral exercises
involving addition and subtraction were limited to numbers to 10, compared to 99
previously, the same limits as those placed on written addition and subtraction (see
Appendix A.12). Such a reduction also gave recognition to the one- rather than two-
212
213
214
Little emphasis on children devising their own strategies, although the 1930
Syllabus, for example, did suggest that Grade VII children "should be given
practice in devising short cuts and easy methods" (Department of Public
Instruction, 1930, p. 45).
When compared to the size of the numbers that children were required to
operate with in their written work29, the limits that were placed on mental calculations
could be considered to have been reasonable. This, despite the gradual increase in
the limit for First Grade mental addition, for example, from 30 in the 1860 Syllabus to
99 in 1930, prior to its reduction to 10 in the 1952 Syllabus. Teachers advocated a
limit of 20 for Class I mental addition during the 1920s (The Teachers Revised
Syllabus, 1927, p. 17). However, this was opposed by some departmental officers.
Representative of their opinions was that of Farrell (1929) who asserted that "tables
and mental exercises [appeared] to have become old-fashioned. [Further,] the too
frequent use of the concrete [had] made [teachers] sacrifice the substance for the
shadow and forget also the end in the means employed" (p. 284). This was a view
indicative of the resistance exhibited towards shifting the teaching focus from the
subject to the child, a shift that was essential if teachers were to acknowledge the
need for placing mental calculations in contexts of relevance to children.
215
The General Introduction to the 1930 Syllabus recognised that any curriculum
may be viewed as (a) a course of study, and (b) as a program of experiences and
activities. Further, it was recognised that "while it is possible to prescribe a definite
course of study, it is not possible to specify what activities the teachers should
devise for the educational benefit of the children" (Department of Public Instruction,
1930, p. vii). The use which teachers make of a prescribed syllabus varies from
teacher to teacher (Edwards, 1937a, p. 25) and is dependent upon such factors as
their understanding of syllabus aims and content, their use of appropriate teaching
strategies, and on the constraints placed on teacher interpretation of these factors.
This was perceived by "Scipio" (1943, pp. 13-14) in his attack on those teachers
who were critical of the 1930 Syllabus in its failure to foster sustained changes in
teaching. Their criticisms, which were anchored in the assumption that positive
changes could be effected by merely adjusting Syllabus content, failed to appreciate
"that the printed programme of work followed by a school is but one of the factors
which determine the quality of work done therein" ("Scipio, 1943, p. 13). Turney
(1972, p. 45) suggested that, by the early 1930s, the syllabus and classroom
practice as well as practice and syllabus ideals were characterised by considerable
schisms, the former dichotomy being particularly applicable to mental arithmetic.
Except for rare commendationsfor example, those of Hendy (1953, p. 2),
Moorhouse (1941, p. 1), Mutch (1907, p. 70), and Pestorius (1939, p. 64)District
Inspectors of Schools were consistently highly critical of the standard of mental
calculation and of the teaching methods used during the period 1860-1965. In the
first District Inspector's report to be published, it was noted that "mental
arithmetic...[was] not generally advanced, [and that] this subject [cannot] be
considered satisfactory till children [could] solve, mentally, a questioninvolving
small numerical operationsin every rule through which they...passed" (Anderson,
1870, p. 14). District Inspector Benbow (1911, p. 67) considered that the absence
of success in mental operations was rather remarkable, particularly considering that
the examples given during his inspections were predominantly easy shopping
transactions, examples in accordance with the third principle delineated in the 1904
Schedule: "The work of the pupil [should be brought] into closer touch with his home
and social surroundings" (Department of Public Instruction, 1904, p. 52).
This principle, reemphasised in the 1914 and 1930 Syllabuses, was one that
District Inspector Hendren (1939, p. 55) would have liked to have seen more
216
217
be valued at more than moderate'" (p. 59). A similar view was held by Benbow
(1926, p. 52), who, for one-teacher schools, regarded a proficiency of forty percent
as being quite satisfactory. District Inspector Kemp (1929, p. 47) believed that a fair
or moderate result in mental arithmetic may actually be considered as being good or
very good. In highlighting characteristics of mental computation, similar to those
discussed in Chapter 2, he suggested that:
Teachers should not expect results in mental arithmetic to equal those obtained
in written work; the two branches vary considerably. The former demanding not
only method of working, but a good memory and a visualisation of the figures
representing the quantities involved. (C. Kemp, 1929, p. 47)
Oral work was often weak [with] many children [taking] far too long to work
simple types in mechanical addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of
numbers, money, and weights and measures....There was a tendency to neglect
the achievement of speed and accuracy in the use of the three extensions and,
often, little use was made of them in oral work after the children had passed
through Grade III. (p. 2)
Prior to the introduction of the 1930 Syllabus, District Inspectors Trudgian (1929, p.
109) and Farrell (1929, p. 290) had decried that speed and accuracy in mental work
were being neglected. In their view, this neglect arose from too much time being
spent on trying to understand problems rather than focussing on achieving correct
answers, and from the practice of doing unnecessary work on paper.
Although children of Grades 3 to 7 in 1946-47 were spending approximately
22% of their mathematics time on mental arithmetic30 (ACER, 1949, pp. 20-21), it
was neglect to which District Inspectors regularly attributed the poor results in
mental arithmetic during the period under investigation (Bevington, 1926, p. 80;
Farrell, 1927, p. 104; Fox, 1905, p. 9; Gutekunst, 1958, p. 8; Platt, 1901, p. 59;
Scott, 1892, p. 92). District Inspector Johnston (1920, p. 98) considered the efforts
218
219
It was also recognised by some District Inspectors that mental arithmetic made
larger demands on a teacher's time, energy, and ability than written work (Canny,
1910, p. 58), particularly in small schools where multiple grades had to be taught. In
many instances, teachers were admonished in their annual reports, and by
implication during their inspections of schools, for not sufficiently preparing for
mental arithmetic lessons (Benbow, 1911, p. 67; Benbow, 1925, p. 51; Harrap,
1908, pp. 46-47; Inglis, 1926, p. 97; Inglis, 1929, p. 86; Kemp, 1917, p. 96;
Radcliffe, 1898, p. 73). Representative of these comments is that of Searle (1956)
who emphasised that:
In very few cases would teachers produce lists of examples that had been
definitely taught to the class when they were asked to do so. [Such] teachers
[imagined] that they [could give] mental exercises extempore, and [did] not stop
to consider that the questions asked [were] of a very stereotyped nature calling
for little reasoning. (p. 7)
Kemp (1917, p. 96) considered the preparation of examples of such importance that
he gave consideration, in his report for 1916, to recommending that failure to do so
should lead to a teacher being officially reprimanded.
That examples were not "properly graded out of school hours" (Benbow, 1911,
p. 67) and matched to the average mental ages of the children in the class (Mutch,
1925, p. 48) often resulted in the examples used being considered as "too
promiscuous...[with] the aims of the lessons too indefinite or too imperfectly
realised" (George, 1930, p. 56). This was a judgement in accordance with the
position of the 1930 Syllabus, which considered that "promiscuous work [was] of
little value" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 33). Given the lack of
preparation considered appropriate, many teachers relied on questions taken
directly from textbooks, "without plan or purpose" (Kemp, 1915, p. 98), a practice
regularly criticised by district inspectors (Cochran, 1955, p. 2; Denniss, 1933, p. 31;
Farrell, 1929, p. 286; Jeffrey, 1930, p. 68). Such a reliance precluded a teacher
from making the mental work "a live part" of the curriculum (Denniss, 1927, p. 62).
Searle (1958, p. 15) expressed concern for the brighter children in the classes of
teachers who indicated that were working through the textbook, albeit the one
supplied by the Department. In Searles (1958, p. 15) view, such children, society's
220
The usual practice [was] for the teacher to give a sum. In many cases the
question [was] repeated. The bright pupils put up hands and shake them up
and down, thereby distracting the attention of many earnest pupils who [were]
trying faithfully to work the sum. The lazy children simply [did] nothing. After a
time the answer [was] written. Then the teacher [started] to do all the work. He
221
generally [worked] it on a board, which [was] little help for the visual process
required. It [was] also the bright pupils who [did] the work and who already
[had] the correct answer. The backward pupils again [did] nothing. After all
this, the teacher [went] cheerfully on with another type of problem, and so the
lesson [proceeded]. There [was] no attempt at individual work or at individual
diagnosis to discover the causes of the failures, and the backward pupils [were]
hardly ever called upon to do any of the work. (pp. 289-290)
222
teachers had received their training up to 40 years earlier and had neither the
opportunity nor the time to keep abreast of modern developments in mathematics
education.
Further, it was from this group of teachers that District Inspectors and Head
Teachers were drawn, many of whom would have been trained under the pupilteacher system. Although they may have become competent teachers, the early
years of their training at least, would have been attained at the expense of the
scholars (Department of Public Instruction, 1928, p. 41). Some were as young as
14 years of age, receiving their teacher training before and following the school day
(Logan & Clarke, 1984, p. 2), thus providing an added difficulty to meeting the
advocacy by District Inspectors for out-of-school preparation of mental arithmetic
examples34. Many of the teachers employed were untrained, particularly in
Provisional Schools where their disproportionate number prior to 190935 was
instrumental in minimising the overall standard of teaching (Logan & Clarke, 1984,
p. 2). As the Queensland Teachers' Journal editorialised in 1936, "it [was] still
possible for Queensland children to be placed in charge of a teacher who...had no
previous teaching experience, no technical training, nor been given any opportunity
to study the theory of modern educational practice (Professional Standards, 1936,
p. 1).
Additionally, little professional development was gained from inspectors during
their visits, in contrast to the hopes expressed following the changes in inspection
procedures introduced in 1904: "[The inspector] can [now] be what he is intended to
be, the professional adviser and assistant to the teacher. He can go where he is
best needed, and can also leave quickly where he is not needed" (The New
Syllabus, 1904, p. 142). Such did not occur until the compulsory inspection of
teachers was discontinued from 1970. As noted by the staff of Albert State School
in 1947: "The present hurried methods make it difficult for the inspector to do
anything but inspect; he has little time to instruct teachers in new methods nor has
he sufficient opportunity to listen to the teacher expressing his ideas" (p. 1).
Not only were Queensland teachers faced with the inadequacy of their training,
but also with the physical lay-out of the school, and the size36 and structure of the
classes that they had to teach. The size of the classes was often exacerbated by
the organisation of classes designed to reduce the numbers in the Scholarship
Class (Fletcher, 1931, p. 51; Pizzy, 1950, p. 17). Mutch (1916) suggested that
223
Benbow (1925) declared in his report for 1924 that it was impossible for
teachers in one-teacher schools to devote time to mental arithmetic because "during
the slate arithmetic lesson of one class the teacher usually is actively employed in
the actual teaching of another subject to one or more of his remaining classes" (p.
51). One method suggested to teachers to enable children to practice mental
arithmetic by themselves, was for an exercise of the form presented in Table 3.3 to
be written on the blackboard, preferably prior to the commencement of class. It was
maintained that such an approach allowed quick workers to work more examples
and to proceed at their own pace; the advantage being that they did not have to wait
for the slow children as in an oral lesson. Further, as the exercises "[were] not
wordy they [could] be read more quickly than mental' sums printed on cards or in
books" (Mental Arithmetic, 1927, p. 18). However, although such exercises could
focus on a range of number types, their use would not necessarily have contributed
to the use of mental arithmetic as an introduction to the written work to follow,
particularly where that work involved problems, nor would it have significantly
contributed to developing a facility with everyday calculations.
224
225
Table 3.3
Extract From Recommended Mental Arithmetic Exercise for "Middle Standards" for
Use by Teachers of Multiple Classes
Inspectors and teachers were subject to a long tradition which stamped the
school as a heavily authoritarian institution. The accumulated experience of
teachers in the system led them to believe that strict order, the threat of
sanctions, repetition, drill and cramming were likely to achieve results in
examinations and during the inspector's visit. (England, 1971, p. 193)
Contributing to this atmosphere was the rigid view of arithmetic and how it
should be taught, characteristic of educators during the period being investigated.
As previously discussed, children needed to be trained to think in logical sequence
and to learn the value of setting out mathematical processes in precise, ordered
steps (Cox & MacDonald, n.d., pp. 180-181). Such a conviction was reflected in the
recommendations that the teacher of arithmetic needed to be a strong disciplinarian
(Cox & MacDonald, n.d., p. 214; Gladman, n.d., p. 77).
226
227
Syllabus for the Fifth Class (see Appendix A.8), manyfor example: .142857 times a
certain number is 18.83, what is the number?went beyond the spirit of its
requirements, and were ones which would have proved very difficult. As "J.R.D."
(1928) records, "The slower ones seldom completed them" (p. 8). The focus, at
least with the decimal examples (see Table 3.4), was on mental calculation by the
rote application of rules, as evidenced by his exhortation for teachers to "get from
the pupils that these are division sums and [that] points must be moved accordingly"
("J.R.D., 1928, p. 8).
The use of such procedures suggests that teachers went beyond the
requirements of the syllabus, as previously discussed, and that the scholarship
mathematics papers influenced the work undertaken in lower grades. The papers
were considered by some to be the official interpretation of the Syllabus (The Real
Issue, 1949, p. 2), at least for the Scholarship Class, and more generally exerted a
firm control over the curriculum in the primary school (Barcan, 1980, p. 9; G. A.
Jones, 1979, p. 20). "The...Commentator" (1947) concluded that "the curriculum for
[grade seven] in our schools [was] the Scholarship examination. The curriculum for
the other grades [was] that part of the 1930 Curriculum which the inspectors deal
with in their annual examination of the school" (p. 21).
Although notation was listed as a separate topic in syllabuses from 1930, its
teaching could be categorised under the intended definition of oral arithmeticas
that in which explanation and discussion were of paramount importance. In some
mental arithmetic texts available to teachers, some of the sets of questions
contained notation items. For example, in a text designed to meet the requirements
of the 1952 Syllabus, Grade VII children were asked to "Write 11 million" and to
"Make 101.03 ten times greater" (Class Teacher's Manual, n.d., p. 12). With the
introduction of the 1948 Amendments it had been stressed that place value
questions should be kept reasonably simple (Greenhalgh, 1947, p. 12).
228
Table 3.4
Examples of Written Items from the 1925 Mathematics Scholarship Paper Given to
Fifth Class Children as Mental
101,101,101.00001
b
What decimal of b is a?
(Presented orally. Time allowed: two seconds)
"Twenty-Keep List" (1942, p. 14) had protested against the practice of problemising
place values. He suggested that it had been intensified and perpetuated by the
monthly examinations set by head teachers. These examinations often "resulted in
the disappointment and mystification of the pupils, [and] chagrin at failure to the
teacher who...[had] not taken the types' so cleverly and secretly worked out"
(Twenty-Keep List, 1942, p. 14). Nonetheless, although the complexity of the
calculations may have been beyond the 1930 Syllabus and may not have been
229
appropriate as mental arithmetic, the nature of such examples was not in conflict
with the syllabus. For Grade V, it had been suggested that children could be asked
"How often is the least one' contained in the greatest one' [in 101.011]?"
(Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 40), a question designed to assist
teachers in "developing the intelligence [of children]" (Department of Public
Instruction, 1930, p. 30).
3.6
for effectively teaching mental arithmetic during the period 1860-1965. These were:
(a) regular and systematic treatment, (b) prior preparation of graded examples, and
(c) basing the mental examples on the written work which was to follow. In
providing for mental arithmetic that was regular and systematic, teachers were
advised that such work should form part of every arithmetic lesson, in contrast to
being taught in isolation (Benbow, 1925, p. 52; Department of Public Instruction,
1914, p. 61; Joyce, 1881, p. 208; Kennedy, 1887, p. 82; "Successful Mental
Arithmetic, 1899, p. 79). The latter, however, was encouraged by the nature of
many of the commercial texts. In one typical of those published from the 1930s,
teachers were advised that the textbook provided "daily sets [of examples] for four
days a week for nine months" (Olsen, 1953, p. i). Such a format did not encourage
nor facilitate the linking of mental and written work, as recommended in the
syllabuses. Nevertheless, some textbooksThe Queensland Arithmetic (Thompson,
1930), for examplerecognised that "no text-book [could] take the place of a skilful
teacher" (p. 1). Through the notes accompanying the 1914 Syllabus, teachers had
been advised not to "trust to any text-book, but should prepare their own series of
questions, adapted to local conditions and needs" (Department of Public Instruction,
1914, p. 70). Somewhat paradoxically, although the 1930 Syllabus did not prescribe
any particular reference, it did recommend Pitman's Mental and Intelligence Tests in
Common-Sense Arithmetic (Potter, n.d.)39 as an appropriate text for teachers to use.
Under the 1860 Regulations for Queensland primary schools, teachers were
permitted only to use the books40 sanctioned by the Board, unless its approval had
been specially obtained (Regulations, 1860, p. 8). In practice, however, other
books were used by teachers for lesson preparation. Margaret Berry, Head
230
Mistress of the Central School for Girls, informed the 1874 Royal Commission on
Education that although her teachers did not have children use any textbook not
authorised by the Board, other texts were used for lesson preparation (Minutes of
Evidence, 1875, p. 96). The list of authorised books published in the 1875
Regulations, which included Moffats Mental Arithmetic, was "intended to show what
books teachers [were] empowered to place, when necessary, in the hands of their
pupils and pupil-teachers" (List of Books, 1880, p. 23). It was further stated that
although they were not confined to the listed books in preparing for their teaching,
they would "be held responsible for the character of [their] lessons" (List of Books,
1880, p. 23).
Effective mental arithmetic lessons were believed to be ones that were relatively
short and conducted in the mornings when children's minds were fresh (Baker,
1929, p. 274; Drain, 1941, p. 2; Teaching Hints, 1908, p. 15). Mental calculation
was considered to be taxing and therefore inadvisable for the strain to be
maintained for long (Gladman, 1904, p. 207; Robinson, 1882, p. 180). Although
some (Joyce, 1881, p. 212; Mental Arithmetic, 1910, p. 176) recommended five to
ten minutes at a maximum, "Howard" (1899, p. 79) suggested that at least fifteen
minutes should be spent early each morning on mental work, with children working
ten or twelve sums. "The profit of the lesson [was judged to be] in proportion to the
number of questions that [had] been answered correctly" (Joyce, 1881, p. 207;
Gladman, 1904, p. 215), thus suggesting an emphasis on the answer rather than on
the strategy used. Supporting this view, Taylor (1928, p. 43) reported that a method
used by a successful teacher involved regular practice for short periods in which the
examples were presented in constantly changing forms and where explanations
were characterised by their brevity. Such was required if children were to develop
the power of concentrating the mind, the development of which required a degree of
effort which few children found easy to make (Martin, 1916, p. 135).
Nonetheless, Gladman (1904), somewhat contradictory to his earlier statement,
also promoted the cultivating of ingenuity through a focus on the strategy used:
Children should be encouraged "to work by different methods. Get them to explain
how they work; their explanation, with [the teacher's] comments, [would] do great
good, especially if [the teacher could] show a readier method" (p. 208). Such an
approach was alluded to in the 1930 Syllabus for Grade I, whereby pupils were
required to give oral statements of the various steps involved in solving mental
231
problemssteps that entailed stating the problem, providing reasons for successive
operations, specifying the rules used for calculating the answer and describing their
working (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 33). Prior to this, it had been
recommended in The Practical Mental Arithmetic, initially issued to schools in
1902, that the "composition of numbers and easy methods of dealing with numbers
should be taught"for example, in mentally calculating 99 + 67, children "should at
once observe the facility of taking 1 from 67 to add to 99" ("An Inspector of Schools,
1914, p. 5).
As recognised by "J.R.D." (1928, p. 7), with the syllabuses from 1905 instructing
teachers to use mental exercises as a preparation for written work, both mechanical
and problem, it was expected that mental arithmetic lessons would be thoroughly
planned. The 1930 Syllabus suggested, albeit for Grade I but applicable to other
grades, as evidenced by inspectors' comments, that "exercises should be well
graded and suited to the average intelligence of the class." (Department of Public
Instruction, 1930, p. 33). Teachers were advised to record the planned examples in
special notebooks for future reference and revision (Fewtrell, 1917, p. 74; Harrap,
1910, p. 56; Shirley, 1913, p. 37). Gladman (n.d., p. 75) had recommended that the
difficulty of the examples should increase until the child needed to use slate and
pencil, the implementation of which would have required an individual or group
approach, one that was not seriously experimented with above Grade II in
Queensland primary schools until the 1960s (Pyle, 1965, p.3). Acting District
Inspector Martin (1916, p. 135) asserted that the use of carefully graded exercises
that lead in steps from the easy to the more difficult would assist children to develop
confidence and determination, key factors in being able to calculate mentally. Such
gradations applied to problem as well as to mechanical work. It was considered
important for children to master problems through their own working and in so doing
gain the self-confidence necessary for attempting further problems even of unlike
types (Farrell, 1929, p. 286).
In consequence of the opinion that the imagination played an important part in
mental arithmetic, it was suggested that questions should be framed so as to "fire
the imagination of the children" (Grade III Mental Arithmetic, 1936, p. 14). This
involved placing the arithmetic into detailed contexts. The long questions41 which
resulted and the reduced number of questions treated during a session were not
seen as difficulties. It was considered more important to exercise the imaginations
232
of the children than "to give them a greater number and have [the pupils] guessing
the answers" (Grade III Mental Arithmetic, 1936, p. 14). A countervailing view
("J.R.D., 1928, p. 7) was that teachers needed to be watchful of the wordiness of a
problem so that the children were not distracted from focusing on the arithmetic
within the setting provided. Nonetheless, it was considered important to place the
numbers used within a context so as to familiarise pupils with the working of
problems (Kennedy, 1889, p. 92).
Significantly, the 1930 Syllabus, in accordance with Ballard's (1927) belief that
"the most profitable form of oral arithmetic...is not that which consisted [of] casual
questions" (p. 18), stated that promiscuous work was considered to be inappropriate
(Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 33). Such work:
Nearly always [meant] asking the first questions that [came] into [a teacher's
head]questions that falsify the importance of tea or sugar, dozens or scores, in
the general scheme of things, and that bear but little relationship either to the
body of mathematical knowledge which the children have already acquired, or to
the new material which they are about to study. As a mental exercise it [was]
casual and fitful, and less closely related to the pupils' needs than to the
grooves in the questioner's mind. (Ballard, 1928b, p. i)
It was necessary for every lesson to have some point to teach: a special rule to
be learned, a short method of calculation or the revision of difficulties (C. Kemp,
1917, p. 96). Only one type, in contrast to the range of types generally presented in
each of the sets of examples in textbooks, was to be the focus in any lesson
(Bevington, 1922, p. 58; "J.R.D., 1928, p. 7; Moorhouse, 1927, p. 96; "Successful
Mental Arithmetic, 1899, p. 79), a recommendation that was made prior to the
introduction of the 1930 Syllabus and the influence of a multiplicity of quasi-official
textbooks. When teaching short methods of mental calculation, Park (1879, p. 13)
stressed that rules developed through rote learning should be avoided. It was
essential that:
233
given in public examinations. Every true teacher who knows "these tricks of the
trade" gives the practice his unhesitating condemnation" (Park, 1879, p. 43)
Gladman (1904) believed that, when teaching short methods, oral exercises
should not be limited to the "strict rule, [but] to go a little way on each side" (p.
208)for example, when focusing on the rule for finding the cost of 100 articles it
was considered useful to have children find the price of such quantities as 98 or 102
articles. Nonetheless, Macgroarty (1879, p. 71) cautioned that any focus on short
methods of calculation should not be at the expense of suitable examples on the
procedures necessary for slate work.
As already implied, mental arithmetic was seen to have had a role in each of the
three clearly marked stages in teaching new arithmetic, namely, (a) the theoretical
or introductory phase in which children were to come to understand the processes
involved in a new rule, (b) the practical or mechanical stage during which neatness,
speed and accuracy were developed, and (c) the application stage during which the
skills acquired were applied to problems (Board of Education, 1937, p. 504;
Teaching Hints, 1908, p. 16). The role of mental examples during the first stage
was to teach the "principle of the [operation],...worked out on the blackboard in such
a way that the method of working [was] clearly seen" (Cox & MacDonald, n.d., 219).
Following the introduction of the 1904 Syllabus, such teaching was to occur in
conjunction with tangible objects, particularly for easier types of addition and
subtraction, using examples involving subject-matter within the children's
experiences (Baker, 1929, p. 274; Teaching of Arithmetic, 1927, p. 292). From this
oral procedure, the method of working was to be determined before proceeding to
the written (Gladman, n.d., p. 74). For each step in the process, teaching and test
exercises were to be prepared. It was considered essential that such mental work
should be based on that related to the application of tables, especially "the extended
addition table, and the practical use of the Multiplication, Money, and Weights and
Measures Tables" (Denniss, 1927, p. 62).
In practice, however, the introduction of new work "largely centred on
demonstration followed by the pupils' working of [written] examples" (Dagg, 1971, p.
75). Martin (1920b, p. 98) pointed out that this method was reasonable for the mere
application of rules and formulae. However, he considered that such an approach
provided for little mental development, which should have been the main aim of
234
every lesson, besides providing for any additions to a pupil's knowledge. Farrell
(1939) noted that there had been a tendency to test new work immediately after its
presentation, at a time when "pupils have hazy ideas, and imperfect knowledge, and
while they lack confidence" (p. 44). Although Farrell (1939) was referring to
teaching in general, his recommendations to teachers during staff talks that
discussion should be allowed for between presentation and testing is reminiscent of
the intended meaning of oral arithmetic.
Recommendations for the use of aids in mental calculation, which came with the
espoused concern for the child from the 1890s, contrasts with Macgroarty's (1879,
p. 71; 1886, p. 63; 1902, p. 67) abhorrence of the use of finger counting, in
particular, and with Joyce's (1881, p. 213) rule for calculating mentally, another
source of the authoritarian nature of mental arithmetic lessons. Joyce (1881)
believed that:
The children, while calculating, should not be allowed to mutter audibly, or even
to move the lips or distort the face; and remember not to let them count on their
fingers. There should be, in fact, no exterior manifestation of the interior
intellectual exertion; the first thing heard should be the answer. (p. 213)
As a method for catering for differing abilities, Olsen (1953, p. i) suggested that
children could occasionally record partial answers as a prop during mental
calculation, a procedure supported by Park (1881, p. 43) and Robinson (1882, p.
180). Farrell (1929), however, advised that the "practice of doing unnecessary work
on paper [resulted] in loss of speed and deterioration in mental work generally" (p.
289). He also suggested that, on occasions, children could be compelled to perform
all the calculations mentally. The Board of Education (1937) stressed that the rule
"Never do work on paper that can be done mentally' often needs to be emphasised"
(p. 514), a procedure with which District Inspector Brown (1901) would have
concurred: The "best results in mental arithmetic [were] secured in schools in which
the pupils [were] trained to perform mentally many of the operations for which the
slate or blackboard [was] commonly used" (p. 85). Alternatively, Kemp (1914, p.
101) advocated using written arithmetic lessons for practice in mental arithmetic by
not requiring children to record every elementary step in the working of a written
calculation, a suggestion with which Gladman (n.d., p. 78) would have concurred,
235
given his advocating an explicit connection between mental and written work
through allowing children to use more efficient mental methods for particular
examples set as written workfor example, by expecting the "elder boys to multiply
by 25 and 125 in one line, and by 2,884,816 in three lines, exclusive of the answer"
(Gladman, n.d., p. 78).
The 1952 and 1964 Syllabuses made particular reference to the belief that
effective oral arithmetic depended on the use of the blackboard and other graphical
aids, particularly for more difficult examples (see Appendices A.12 & A.13).
However, it was considered by some that the blackboard needed to be used
judiciously. "Domas" (1952, p. 11) cautioned that, in instances where mental
examples had been written on the board, mental arithmetic had a tendency to
develop into written tests, a conclusion which may also be attached to the use of
written examples on cards. Nonetheless, in recognising that some children had
difficulty remembering significant details from examples presented orally, it was
suggested in Grade III Mental Arithmetic (1936, p. 15) that cards, with five questions
on each, could be used once a week. It was suggested that it was appropriate for
slower children to do fewer than the five as was "it not better that they should
successfully do these [few] than do none at all under the dictation system?" (Grade
III Mental Arithmetic, 1936, p. 15).
"An Inspector of Schools" (1914, p. 3) maintained that the tendency for mental
arithmetic to become a written test was also manifested in instances where pupils
recorded their answers to a series of oral questions in writing. Although such a
procedure allowed the teacher to identify the lazy children, it did not facilitate the
explanation of the operations necessary to calculate an answer. However, "the evil
to be guarded against...[during the oral presentation of answers was] that it
[afforded] much opportunity for lazy pupils to neglect making calculations, relying on
the sharper and more industrious to satisfy the teacher with answers" ("An Inspector
of Schools, 1914, p. 3). Rapid question delivery was one of the means by which
listlessness and inattention could be prevented (Robinson, 1882, p. 180). Ross
(1893) believed that such exercises as "2s. 3d + 6d + 9d + 2s. 6d...with a long
pause between each item, [were] neither instructive nor amusing. Speed and
accuracy should both be aimed at" (p. 83). In instances where children were
required to provide written answers, "J.R.D." (1928) cautioned that much valuable
teaching time could be lost marking the slates of those who claimed to have the
236
correct answer. Time was better spent focusing on those who were incorrect and
"teaching them without delay" (p. 7).
Given that the intention under each of the syllabuses was for children principally
to become proficient in written arithmetic, little support was shown for Acting District
Inspector Papi's (1912, p. 51) suggestion that teachers should devote the time spent
on written arithmetic to mental. However, he believed that once proficiency with
mental arithmetic was attained accuracy and speed in written work would
necessarily follow. Nonetheless, with the general neglect by teachers of the
recommendation that mental arithmetic should be a precursor to the written, it is not
unexpected, in light of the analyses in Chapter 2, that Farrell (1929, p. 283) should
have reported that children fail to calculate mentally on their leaving primary school.
He noted further that "professional men and tradesmen [complained] that...the
Arithmetical exercises [which could be interpreted as including those for mental
arithmetic]...had no bearing on the problems met with in the affairs of every-day life"
(Farrell, 1929, p. 283). Recognising that individuals relate to particular calculative
situations in idiosyncratic ways, "Vigilate" (1950) asserted that:
The whole trouble seems to be that though in many ways arithmetic may be an
exact science with regard to its truths, formulae and fundamental methods, it is
not an exact science concerning its application, where the sky's the limit, without
defined horizons and a comprehensible ceiling. (p. 11)
3.7
role of mental arithmetic during the period 1860 to 1965. It is evident that the
historical record is substantially limited to the beliefs and opinions of two groups of
stakeholders, namely, those of District Inspectors of Schools, as recorded in their
annual reports, and of teachers, as expressed through publications of the
Queensland Teachers' Union. Although these two groups of departmental officers
often expressed differing opinions about issues which impinged on classroom
practice, taken together, their recorded views, in conjunction with syllabus
documents, have enabled a clear picture of mental arithmetic to emerge.
237
Although generally there was unanimity in the views of teachers, albeit of those
involved in the affairs of the Union, the inspectorate was not noted for its
concordance on many issues. As the Director of Primary Education noted in his
report for 1960, there tended to be "little unanimity of outlook among inspectors"
(Guymer, 1961, p. 8). Nevertheless, as had been cautioned earlier, these
differences of opinion were not to be taken as a house divided against itself
(Edwards, 1931, p. 28; Ewart, 1901, p. 55), but as evidence of the inherent elasticity
of the Department and of the Syllabus (Edwards, 1931, p. 28), albeit an elasticity
that had resulted in teacher confusion with respect to syllabus implementation.
However, in contrast to the differences of opinion which members of the
inspectorate may have held on many educational issues, those associated with
mental arithmetic were ones on which there was general agreement. Inspectors
consistently reported that children lacked the ability to efficiently calculate mentally,
that teachers did not plan their teaching effectively and that mental arithmetic did not
receive the regular and systematic treatment which was required for meeting
syllabus expectations. Although not always disagreeing with inspectors, teachers,
particularly through their union and its publications, championed beliefs about
mental arithmetic and associated Departmental procedures which they saw as
essential to the improvement of teachingnot the least of which was the abolition of
the Scholarship examination and the system of teacher inspection, which occurred
in 1963 and 1970, respectively.
To provide a focus for the presentation and analysis of the historical data, a
number of research questions were posed. The following provides a summary of
key points related to each.
1.
238
239
District Inspectors in their annual reports (Bevington, 1926, p. 80; Caine, 1878, p.
97; Macgroarty, 1891, p. 75; Router, 1941, p. 2).
Although the degree to which the belief in the disciplinary powers of mental
arithmetic remained fairly constant during this period, it is evident that the belief in
its social usefulness gained ascendancy. The changes made to the mathematics
syllabus in 1948, and continued in 1952, were aimed at ensuring that children
developed skill in the calculations that needed to be made in daily life (Department
of Public Instruction, 1948b, p. 17). The predominant educational philosophy from
the 1930s was realism (Greenhalgh, 1947, p. 11). With the perceived discrediting of
the transfer of training, it was believed that "the only things worth teaching were
those for which there was some obvious and immediate use" (Kolesnik, 1958, p. 5).
2.
240
generally not exhibited in classrooms, nor in syllabus documents. The terms came
to be used interchangeably. In the 1914 Syllabus, with respect to the First Class,
oral arithmetic was viewed as "nothing more that a ready application of the tables"
(Department of Public Instruction, 1914, p. 64), a view echoed by Lidgate (1954, p.
2) with respect to the oral arithmetic for all grades.
Occasionally, textbook authors and District Inspectors of Schools attempted to
broaden the view of mental arithmetic. Joyce (1881, p. 210), while defining an
effective practical arithmetician as one who could mentally perform the short
computations of everyday living, recognised that these required more than the rote
application of short methods of calculation. In his view, individuals needed to be
able to mentally perform "all kinds of numerical combinations..., from the common
addition table up to the most complicated operations" (Joyce, 1881, p. 210).
Recognition was also periodically given to a need for encouraging children to
develop a "dexterity with numbers" ("An Inspector of Schools, 1914, p. 3; Cox &
MacDonald, n.d., p. 217; Joyce, 1881, p. 210; Mutch, 1924, p. 40).
However, only Bevington (1925, p. 83) and Cox and MacDonald (n.d., pp. 224,
231) specifically referred to strategies similar to those identified in Chapter 2 as
being based on instrumental understandingones that could be defined as
compensatory and worked from the left. District Inspector Kennedy (1903) argued
against the use of written methods for mental calculation, methods he considered as
"quite out of place" (p. 69). Nonetheless, by 1952, as a consequence of the reaction
to the misinterpretations of syllabus requirements by teachers, Head Teachers and
District Inspectors during the 1930s and 1940s, coupled with the long-held view of
mental arithmetic as initiatory to written arithmetic, this became the recommended
approach to mental calculation"The processes which are applied orally [that is,
mentally] are the same as those used in written operations" (Department of Public
Instruction, 1952b, p. 2). This view is one reason for the poor performances on
mental arithmetic which were regularly criticised by District Inspectors in their
reports, criticisms that continued into the 1950s and 1960s, even though there was
increased specificity following criticisms of syllabus vagueness (Arithmetic, 1927,
p. 17), and despite adjustments being made to grade placements of mental
arithmetic tasks, in light of research findings concerning the written mathematical
expectations of Queensland children (Cunningham & Price, 1934).
241
242
3.
What was the role of mental computation within the mathematics curricula from
1860 to 1965?
The roles ascribed to mental arithmetic centred on its usefulness as: (a) a
pedagogical tool, (b) a skill that was socially useful, and (c) a means for "quickening
the intelligence" (Bevington, 1926, p. 80; Robinson, 1882, p. 179); issues that have
been mentioned previously with respect to the first two research questions. As a
pedagogical tool, mental arithmetic was seen to have had a role in each of the three
stages for teaching new arithmetical ideas: (a) to assist teaching the processes
involved, (b) developing speed and accuracy, and (c) applying the new skills to
problems (Board of Education, 1937, p. 504; Teaching Hints, 1908, p. 16). Each
syllabus from 1904 to 1964 highlighted that mental arithmetic should be initiatory to
written work"Mental calculations should be the basis of all the instruction, and the
pupils should be made familiar by mental exercises with the principles underlying
every [operation] before the written work is undertaken" (Schedule XIV, 1904, p.
201); a view previously expressed by Ross (1885, p. 70).
The spiral nature of the syllabuses from 1930 embodied this belief in their
allocation of requirements across the range of topics in mental and written arithmetic
for each grade. Taking an associationist view, the Board of Education's (1937)
Handbook of Suggestions, which influenced the preparation of the 1930 and 1952
Syllabuses, stated that the mechanical rules of written arithmetic are "forms of
mental technique or...complex habits to be formed" (p. 506), thus implying the rote
nature of written work; a belief transposed to mental calculation in the 1952 Syllabus
by its statement that the "processes applied orally are the same as those used in
written operations" (Department of Public Instruction, 1952b, p. 2).
Mental work was also seen as a means for drilling basic facts, cultivating speed
and accuracy in new work and revising work essential for sound progress (Board of
Education, 1937, p. 513; Cochran, 1960, p.12; Mutch, 1916, p. 62). This approach
enabled "at least four times the ground to be covered" (Farrell, 1929, p. 295) in
revision work. However, it is likely that this role was one that contributed to the
243
belief that mental arithmetic constituted the presentation of a series of examples, the
focus of which was the gaining of correct answers.
Although not specifically mentioned in a Queensland syllabus prior to that of
1952, the recognition given to the social usefulness of mental arithmetic was a
distinguishing feature of the arithmetic recommended for Queensland schools,
particularly through the reports of District Inspectors, and through textbooks and
journal articles, as referred to under the first research question. This recognition
was given in context with the social usefulness of arithmetic generally, a factor
emphasised in the 1914 and 1930 Syllabuses. Nonetheless, teachers were often
criticised for not giving sufficient recognition to its practical importance (Canny,
1893, p. 102; W. H. Smith, 1914, p. 78; Woodgate, 1955, p. 2), a criticism
inextricably bound to District Inspectors' adverse reports on the quality of mental
arithmetic teaching.
As noted above, Queensland teachers maintained a belief in the role of mental
arithmetic as a means for developing thinking power (Mutch, 1907, p. 70),
particularly with respect to its role in promoting powers of concentration (Welton,
1924, p. 409). The development of an ability to concentrate on a task required
educational effort (Martin, 1916, p. 135) and this gave "strength and activity to the
mind" (Park, 1879, p. 43). However, not all children were willing to give the
necessary mental effort, the consequence of which was to attribute the poor
performances on mental arithmetic "simply to the lack of concentration and [the]
ability to visualize" (Baker, 1953, p. 2). As recognised by the English Board of
Education (1959) in the late 1950s, the use of mathematics, including mental
arithmetic, as a means for developing concentration, accuracy and logical thinking,
which in its crudest form encouraged the belief that such skills were automatically
transferred to non-mathematical activities, had been discredited. Nonetheless, it
was believed "that mathematics, well taught, may have an influence on children's
general attitude to learning, and that ways of tackling problems in other situations
are influenced for good by sound mathematical training" (Board of Education, 1959,
p. 180).
4.
What was the nature of the teaching practices used to develop a child's ability to
calculate exact answers mentally during the period 1860-1965?
244
During the period being investigated three tenets for teaching mental arithmetic
were consistently advocated. These were: (a) regular and systematic treatment, (b)
prior preparation of graded examples, and (c) the need to base the mental examples
on the written work which was to follow. The profit of a lesson was believed to be in
the number of questions answered correctly (Gladman, 1904, p. 215) in a period of
five to ten minutes. Rapid question delivery was essential to prevent listlessness
and inattention (Robinson, 1882, p. 180). Taylor (1928, p. 43), in contrast to
Bevington (1922, p. 58) and Moorhouse (1927, p. 96), suggested that the examples
given should constitute a range of forms and that explanations should be kept to a
minimum. Such an approach was considered to have the effect of "concentrating
the mind" (Martin, 1916, p. 135), with the examples selected having relevance for
the goal of a lessona particular operation, a short method or revision (Kemp, 1917,
p. 96).
The Board of Education (1937, p. 514) recommended that children should never
be required to work in writing those calculations that could be undertaken mentally.
Prior to this, Gladman (n.d., p. 75) had suggested that children should work the
prepared graded examples mentally to a point where pencil and slate were required.
To encourage mental calculation, it was held that there was a need to "fire the
imagination of the children" (Grade III Mental Arithmetic, 1936, p. 14) by placing
the examples into contexts familiar to the child, a recommendation in keeping with
the third principle espoused in the 1904 and subsequent syllabuses"to bring the
work of the pupil into closer touch with his home and social surroundings"
(Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 200). However, given the tendency of some who followed
this suggestion to present wordy examples, "J.R.D." (1928, p. 7) cautioned that it
was essential for the arithmetic not to get misplaced in the complexity of the
situation presented.
The use of the blackboard was considered necessary for effective oral
arithmetic, particularly for difficult examples (Department of Public Instruction,
1952b, p. 20; Department of Education, 1964, p. 11). However, as Farrell (1929, p.
289) noted, at least during the 1920s, there was a tendency for teachers to do all
the working on the blackboard to the detriment of children's understanding of the
processes involved. Additionally, it was argued that, where examples were written
on the board prior to calculation, the propensity for mental arithmetic to become a
written test was increased ("Domas, 1952, p. 11). This added to the view that
245
mental arithmetic constituted testing rather than teaching, an outcome that resulted
in both teachers and students expressing apprehension with respect to mental
arithmetic (Greenhalgh, 1947, p. 11).
5.
What was the nature of the resources used to support the teaching of mental
computation during the period 1860-1965?
With the introduction of the 1904 Syllabus in January 1905, teachers were
encouraged to make "the self-activity of the pupil the basis of school instruction"
(Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 200), a recommendation specifically contained in the 1914
and 1930 Syllabuses, and implied in those subsequently introduced. Teachers were
encouraged to allow children to see and handle quantities of actual thingssticks in
tens and hundreds, the foot-rule, money, weights. It was recommended that a
child's introduction to number should be through the senses (Department of Public
Instruction, 1930, p. 30). However, besides the use of the blackboard, little use
appears to have been made of such aids to support a child's mental calculations.
When observing that mental exercises were being neglected in schools, Farrell
(1929, p. 284) suggested that the use of the concrete had diverted teachers and
children from the all-important abstract manipulation of numbers.
In instances where District Inspectors did refer to aids to support mental
arithmetic, it was usually to the use of printed sheets and textbooks, the ad hoc use
of which was identified as a reason for the poor performances on the mental
arithmetic tests given during their inspections. The format of each of these texts
(see Table 3.2) was predominantly in the form of sets of mechanical examples,
which, although often referring to money and measures, did not sufficiently provide
clear links to the "things by which the child is surrounded and [to] things in which he
was interested" (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. 30). The format and
content of the sets of questions supported the view that mental arithmetic lessons
should involve the working of a number of questions in a relatively short period of
time, the success of which was measured by the number of correct answers.
Similar criticisms may be made of the teaching notes published in the
Queensland Educational Journal and Queensland Teachers' Journal. Further, many
of these articles were designated as mental arithmetic testsfor example, Mental
Arithmetic Tests (1910), Mental Tests (1930)thus reinforcing the view that the
246
mental arithmetic lesson be equated with testing procedures. Further, even where
testing was the legitimate goal of a lesson, the use of such examples did not allow
teachers to implement the direction, as contained in the 1914 Syllabus, that
"teachers should not trust to any text-book, but should prepare their own series of
questions, adapted to local conditions and needs" (Department of Public Instruction,
1914, p. 70).
However, given the conditions under which they had to operatetheir
inadequate training, their desire for greater specificity in grade requirements, the
pressures exerted by Head Teachers, District Inspectors and Scholarship
Examinersit is not inconsistent that teachers should have embraced the examples
provided as the published materials became available. Paradoxically, the
consequence of this was for teachers, particularly during the 1930s and 1940s, to
exacerbate the basis of their criticisms of the syllabus as being overloaded. As
"Green Ant" (1942, p. 17) observed, the extensions to the syllabus requirements by
the textbooks were most flagrant for mental arithmetic. Their requirements set the
standard of work expected for each grade (Dagg, 1971, p. 57). Whether or not this
remained a consequence of textbook use post-1965 was an avenue of investigation
discussed in the next chapter, the purpose of which was to extend the
understanding of mental arithmetic in Queensland schools beyond the era in which
it was included as a specific branch of the mathematics syllabus.
250
CHAPTER 4
Introduction
In contrast to the mathematics syllabuses introduced into Queensland primary
schools during the period 1860-1965, a focus on mental computation was not a
feature of those introduced during the New Maths era, which effectively occurred in
Queensland between 1966 and 1987; nor is it considered explicitly in the current
Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a).
Nonetheless, as discussed in Chapter 1, there has been a resurgence of interest in
mental computation from the late 1980s, as a consequence of which is an emphasis
on the calculation of exact answers mentally in national documents designed to
guide syllabus development in AustraliaA National Statement on Mathematics for
Australian Schools (AEC, 1991), for example. Such a development is one that
parallels that which has occurred in the United States, where educational authorities
are attempting to implement the Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School
Mathematics (NCTM, 1989).
Hence, to extend an understanding of mental computation within Queensland
primary schools from 1966 to the present, it is not only necessary to analyse
syllabus documents of the period, but also to consider the nature and effects of
recent Queensland curriculum initiatives which have relevance for mental
computation. Further, for recommendations to be formulated to enhance the
teaching of mental computation, it is essential to gain an understanding of teachers
current beliefs and teaching practices, the origins of which may be embedded in
those of the past. This chapter, therefore, is structured around (a) an analysis of
mental computation under the syllabuses from 1966-1987, (b) a survey of
Queensland primary school personnel, and (c) an analysis of recent curriculum
initiatives in Queensland state primary schools relevant to mental computation.
251
252
1. What beliefs do teachers currently hold with respect to the nature and role
of mental computation and how it should be taught?
2. What emphasis was given to mental computation in the period 1966-1987,
with respect to both syllabus documents and teachers?
3. What emphasis is currently placed on developing the ability to compute
mentally?
4. What are the characteristics of the teaching approaches currently used to
develop the ability to calculate exact answers mentally?
5. What were the characteristics of the teaching approaches used to develop
the ability to calculate exact answers mentally during the period 19661987?
6. What need for inservice on mental computation is expressed by school
personnel?
7. What was the nature of the resources used to support the teaching of
mental computation during the period 1966-1987 and of those used
currently?
8. What is the relevance to mental computation of recent initiatives in
mathematics education in Queensland?
4.2
253
were ultimately of greater consequence than the modifications made to the syllabus
in 1964 (Department of Education, 1978, p. 3).
Primarily through the influence of Piaget, "probably the most outstanding
psychologist of the day" (Department of Education, 1966, p. i), it was recognised
that an over-simplified behavioural theory of learning, using the stimulus-response
model, was no longer adequate to describe mathematics learning (Hughes, 1965, p.
32). This recognition was also influenced by the work of European and English
mathematics educatorsthat of Dienes, Gattegno, and Fletcher, for examplein
which an emphasis was placed on the needs and interests of the child and how
mathematical ideas grow in the minds of children (Keeves, 1965, p. 6). An
emphasis was therefore placed on the discovery approach to teaching and learning
(Department of Education, 1967, p. i), the rediscovery of which was, in Gordon
Jones' (1967) view, "probably the most important development in pedagogy
associated with modern mathematics" (p. 23). Following a series of conferences
sponsored by the Australian Mathematical Society and the Australian Council of
Educational Research in the early-1960s, Blakers (1978) was later to observe:
254
Table 4.1
Queensland Mathematics Schedules and Syllabuses: 1965-1987
numbers up to 100, (b) "combined multiplication and addition to 100, and (c)
"division with remainders within 100" (Department of Education, 1967, p. 13). This
is reflected in the findings presented later in this chapter which indicate that the
teachers surveyed believed that the Program in Mathematics (Department of
Education, 1966-1968, 1975) placed considerably less emphasis on mental
arithmetic than the 1964 Syllabus. Nonetheless, it is likely that, during
implementation of the 1967, 1968, and 1975 Syllabuses, teachers continued to
place an emphasis on mental arithmetic as a means for drilling basic facts,
cultivating speed and accuracy, and for revision. Data from the survey reveals that,
in contrast to their views about the importance of mental arithmetic embodied in the
syllabuses, many teachers continued to place great importance on mental
arithmetic, at least as traditionally defined (see Table 4.13).
The various editions of the Program in Mathematics (Department of Education,
1966-1968, 1975) embodied a concern for developing an understanding of
"underlying properties inherent in number systems and the discovery of underlying
principles that enable...[the investigation of] many different areas of inquiry" (G. J.
Jones, 1967, p, 20)that is, the syllabuses embodied a concern for structure of the
number system. However, stemming from an inadequate understanding of the
intent of the syllabuses, teachers became focused on developing the standard
255
256
4.3
data obtained have been presented using the following major headings: (a) Survey
Method, (b) Survey Results, and (c) Discussion. The latter includes the conclusions
drawn with respect to each of the specific research questions outlined in Section
4.3.1. The data from the survey reported in this chapter are designed to provide an
understanding of:
257
258
development of the survey instrument and its analysis, (b) the instrument itself, (c)
the sample of Queensland state school teachers and administrators, (d) the method
of implementation, and (e) the procedures used to analyse the data.
Research Questions
To gain an understanding of the issues associated with the beliefs and teaching
practices related to mental computation, as delineated above, questions were posed
in relation to each. These are:
1.
(ii)
(iii)
(b)
2.
3.
259
(ii)
Are the teaching approaches employed by middle- and upperschool teachers consistent with their stated beliefs?
(b)
4.
5.
(b)
What was the nature of the resources used to support the teaching of
mental computation during the period 1964-1987?
Instrument Used
The instrument used to undertake the survey of Queensland state primary
school teachers and administrators was a postal, self-completion
opinionnaire/questionnaire (Appendix C). In descriptive research, instrument items
concentrate on the phenomenon to be described and on background characteristics,
rather than on the identification of dependent and independent variables essential to
explanatory research (de Vaus, 1991, p. 81). Hence, in keeping with the research
purposes and questions, the survey instrument was divided into four sections:
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4
Background Information.
260
261
placed on the ability to compute exact answers mentally by each of the three
syllabuses, and by the respondents themselves during these periods. Items 43 to
46 reflect the traditional approach to developing mental computation skills. Given
that responding to items in this section of the survey instrument required teachers to
recall past teaching practices, an unsure category was added to the four-point Likert
scale used in Section 2, and to that related to the importance of mental computation
(see Appendix C).
The items in the survey instrument were developed in association with Dr Calvin
Irons, the researcher's supervisor, as well as with school personnel who have some
expertise in educational research. Further revisions to the instrument resulted from
its piloting with 10 teachers of Years 1 to 7 from an outer-Brisbane school which
was not part of the sample of schools to be surveyed. Item analyses using
correlational techniques were not undertaken in finalising the instrument. Such is in
accordance with Tuckmans (1988) view that these procedures are "not as critical
for the refinement of questionnaires as they are for the refinement of tests.
Questionnaire items are usually reviewed for clarity and distribution of responses
without necessarily running an item analysis" (p. 226).
During the revision of items based on trial data, an attempt was made to
address the four assumptions on which survey research depends. Karweit (1982, p.
1837) describes these as:
The respondent should understand the question in the same way as the
researcher.
Sample
It was intended that the data collected should be representative of the views of
the 11,970 Queensland state primary school teachers and administrators. However,
given the size of the population, direct sampling of school personnel would have
been an impractical task. Further, data are not readily available to undertake the
262
263
Table 4.2
Sample of Schools by Band Within Educational Regions
Band of school
Region
10
Total
9
1b
6
1c
10
1
27
3
18
2
6
1
77
9
11.7
Metropolitan
West
11
1
33
3
13
1
25
3
39
4
21
2c
143
14
9.8
Metropolitan
East
5
1c
10
1
33
3
45
5
10
1
3
1
108
12
11.1
Darling
Downs
19
2
37
4
26
3
12
1
20
2
3
1c
119
13
10.9
South
Western
23
2
10
1
9
1
8
1
6
1c
3
1
19
2
33
3
24
2
14
1
29
3c
Wide Bay
Capricornia
22
2
45
5c
24
2
18
2
29
3
12
1
150
15
10.0
Northern
16
2
16
2c
15
2
7
1
15
2
11
1
80
10
12.5
North
Western
10
1
7
1
5
1
8
1c
3
1
36
5
13.8
11
1
21
2
27
3
12
1
23
2
15
2c
Peninsula
111
11
9.9
2
1c
6
1
9
1
19
2
13
1
20
2
70
8
11.4
153
16
10.4
260
28
10.8
111
13
11.7
35
4
11.4
1075
115
10.7
Sunshine
Coast
South Coast
135
13
9.6
Total
Note.
218
24
11.0
163
17
10.4
59
7
11.9
1
122
11
9.0
Top line in each row: Number of schools in Region/Band. bBottom line in each row:
Number of schools in sample. cOne school in sample was a trial school for SPS in
1993
264
with respect to aspects of the 1975 edition of the Program in Mathematics for
Queensland Primary Schools (Department of Education, 1975).
Alreck and Settle (1985) suggest that:
For each cell in Table 4.2 with 10 or more schools, 10% of the number of
schools, rounded to the nearest 10, were randomly selected. To ensure that the
percentage selected from each region and band was approximately 10%, further
random selections were drawn from cells with fewer than ten schools. Prior to the
random selection from each cell, given that the experiences of teachers trialing the
Student Performance Standards in mathematics may have had an impact on their
views of mental computation, one trial school from each region was randomly
selected. These schools formed part of the 10% of schools selected from the cell in
which they were categorised. On average, four primary schools were involved in the
trial of Student Performance Standards in mathematics within each Educational
Region.
From the Directory of Queensland State Schools (Department of Education,
1991) it was determined that the 115 schools selected would provide a potential
sample of approximately 1400 school personnel. With a potential sample of this
magnitude, even allowing for a high nonresponse rate, 50% for example, it was
projected that the actual sample of school personnel would fall comfortably within
the range suggested by Alreck and Settle (1985, p. 89) referred to previously.
It was recognised that in conducting a postal, self-completion survey control
over who completes the questionnaire would be limited. The sample of teachers
and administrators who participated within each of the schools was therefore largely
self-selected. This introduced bias into the resultant sample (Karweit, 1982, p.
1839) of school personnel. However unavoidable this source of bias may be, it
does necessitate cautious generalisation of the conclusions that are drawn from this
study.
265
Research Procedure
The research was undertaken during Term 4 (October-December) of the 1993
school year. Three mailings to schools in the sample were undertaken. The initial
mailing occurred on 4 October 1993, with follow-up correspondence being sent on
25 October and 28 November 1993 (see Appendix D). The initial mailing was timed
so that the initial letter would not be received as part of the volume of mail usually
received by schools at the commencement of a school term.
Gay (1987) suggests that "it is sometimes worth the effort to do a preliminary
check of potential respondents to determine their receptivity...and it is more
productive to send the questionnaire to a person in authority" (p. 196), the latter also
being the protocol where the purpose is to gain access to school personnel. As
discussed below, this study was to be undertaken in a climate within schools not
conducive to the willing involvement of teachers and administrators in the
completion of survey instruments. This climate had arisen from the number of
surveys, usually with short time-frames, that had been sent to schools from various
sources during a period of rapid structural and curriculum change, change
particularly associated with the management of schools and the concomitant
increased expectations placed on teachers.
Following Gay's (1987, p. 196) suggestion, in an endeavour to maximise
participation by teachers and administrators, a letter was sent to each school
principal explaining the purpose of the survey (see Appendices C.1 & C.2). The
letter invited the principal, or another staff member, to act as Contact Person for the
receipt and management of questionnaires within their school, and to indicate how
many questionnaires they wished to receive. Cavanagh and Rodwell (1992, p. 286)
suggest that obtaining contact persons is one method by which the response rate
may be maximised. In the case of one-teacher schools, the principal was invited to
participate in the study. This approach was also designed to reduce the cost of
printing, packaging, and mailing questionnaires that would not have been returned.
The initial mailing also contained a letter of authority from The Executive Director,
Review and Evaluation Section of the Queensland Department of Education. This
letter provided approval for the study to be conducted in the 115 schools nominated
as the sample.
Following the initial mailing on 4 October 1993, 52 schools agreed to participate
in the survey and 27 schools declined the invitation to be involved. No response
266
was received from 36 of the 115 schools. The number of questionnaires requested
by each school was dispatched in three batches as the participation forms were
received. A deadline of three weeks from the date of dispatch was given for the
return of the survey forms. Three hundred and ninety-five (395) questionnaires
were sent to the 52 schools that had agreed to participate.
Annotations on some participation forms returned by schools not wishing to
receive the survey instrument provided reasons for their non-involvement. The
annotations included:
"We do not have any time to complete any more surveys this year."
"We are committed with LOTE [Language Other Than English] immersion
and inclusive curriculum project."
267
Methods of Analysis
The data from each respondent was coded in the form indicated below, and
analysed using various subprograms of the Studentware version of the Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences, SPSS/PC+ Studentware Plus (Norusis, 1991):
1.
2.
3.
4.
(b)
Items 41a to 46cNever (1), Seldom (2), Sometimes (3), Often (4),
Unsure (5), Missing (9).
5.
Background Information:
(a)
268
(05), Wide Bay (06), Capricornia (07), Northern (08), North West (09),
Peninsula (10). South Coast (11), Missing (99).
(b)
(c)
Item 49 (Years of teaching experience)< 1 yr (1), 1-5 yrs (2), 6-10 yrs
(3), 11-15 yrs (4), 16-20 yrs (5), 21-25 yrs (6), 26-30 yrs (7), 30+ yrs
(8), Missing (9).
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
269
considered sufficient to present the data for each item as a frequency distribution
(see Tables 4.7 to 4.14).
To facilitate an understanding of the degree to which school personnel espouse
nontraditional beliefs and teaching practices concerning mental computationthose
that are reflective of beliefs and practices currently advocated by mathematics
educatorsthe mean ratings for selected items have been presented on continua
(Figures 4.1 to 4.5). Although the theoretical measure of central tendency for
ordinal data is the median, a scan of the data revealed that the means of item
ratings would better reflect the spread of opinion in such graphical representations.
For example, for the items represented in Figure 4.1 the median for each variable is
3, whereas the means range from 2.63 to 3.24, with standard deviations of .74 and
.55, respectively.
To present the percentage distribution for each item in Section 1 of the survey
instrument (Beliefs), the items were grouped into four categories. These were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The mean rating was calculated for each item in Categories 2, 3, and 4 (see
Figures 4.1 to 4.3), except for Items 12, 18, and 23 in Category 3. It was considered
inappropriate to interpret these items in terms of their reflecting traditional or
nontraditional beliefs, as, for example, conducting a series of mental computation
sessions each week (Item 23) has relevance to both orientations. In calculating the
means, the scoring for items that reflect a traditional approach was reversed to
facilitate their placement on traditional-nontraditional continua. Hence, Items 3, 5, 8,
15, 16, 17, 20, and 21 (see Appendix C) were recoded as: Strongly Disagree (4),
Disagree (3), Agree (2), and Strongly Agree (1). Appendix E presents the standard
deviation of each mean.
270
The purpose of Section 2.1 of the survey instrument was to determine how
frequently present classroom teachers use each of a range of teaching techniques
to develop the ability to mentally calculate exact answers beyond the basic facts.
The Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Teaching, Curriculum and Assessment Guidelines
(Department of Education, 1987b, pp. 16-17) suggests that children should begin to
experience mental strategies to extend the basic facts from Year 2 for addition, Year
3 for subtraction, Year 4 for multiplication, and from Year 5 for division. For each
operation, it is expected that as many children as possible will develop proficiency
by Year 7. The focus during Years 1, 2, and 3 is primarily on the development of
basic fact knowledge. Hence, in analysing the responses to the items in Section
2.1, it was considered appropriate that the data to be analysed should be restricted
to those from teachers of Years 4 to 7.
It was anticipated that many teachers would be responsible for multi-agemultigradeclasses. Additionally, it was assumed that, in responding to items related to
developing the ability to calculate exact answers mentally beyond the basic facts,
respondents would be likely to indicate their teaching practices with respect to the
highest year level taught. Classroom teachers and teaching principals of multi-age
classes were therefore classified by the highest year level taught and categorised as
a lower-school (Years 1 to 3), middle-school (Years 4 and 5) or upper-school (Years
6 and 7) teacher. Teachers of single classes were classified similarly. For the
purposes of the presentation of data from Section 2.1 (see Table 4.12) and their
analysis, only data from middle- and upper-school teachers, with respect to current
teaching practices, were considered.
To gain insights into the degree to which current teaching practices of middleand upper-school teachers reflect a nontraditional approach, means for items in
Section 2 that referred to specific teaching practices were calculated and presented
on a continuum (Figure 4.4). The coding for items reflecting traditional teaching
practices was reversed, namely Never (4), Seldom (3), Sometimes (2), and Often
(1). Items 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, and 36 (see Appendix C) were selected for
analysis, with Items 29, 30, 33, 34, and 36 being recoded (see Appendix E).
Section 3 of the survey instrument was designed to elicit opinions and past
teaching practices related to mental computation within the context of Queensland
mathematics syllabuses in use between 1964 and 1987 (see Table 4.1). As
previously intimated, the Program in Mathematics for Primary Schools (Department
of Education, 1966-1968) progressively replaced the 1964 Syllabus during the late
271
1960s, with the program for Grades 6 and 7 being introduced in 1969. This syllabus
was revised in 1975 and remained in use until 1987 when the Years 1 to 10
Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a) became the basis on
which mathematics teaching was to be planned for Queensland primary school
pupils. Hence, the time periods used were: 1964-1968, 1969-1974, and 1975-1987.
As the purpose of this section was to gain insights from school personnel who
had teaching experience in Queensland classrooms during each of these three
periods, responses were selected for analysis on the basis of their length of service
(Item 49): (a) for the 1964 Syllabus, teaching for more than 25 years; (b) for the first
edition of the Program in Mathematics (Department of Education, 1966-1968),
teaching for more than 20 years; and (c) for the 1975 edition of the program,
teaching for six years or more. It is recognised that this procedure may have
resulted in some loss of data. It is possible that school personnel, with noncontiguous teaching careers, may have taught during one or more of these periods
but not have a length of service matching the selection criteria. However, an
advantage of applying these criteria is the exclusion of responses from teachers
who did not teach during any of the periods under investigation. An analysis of the
data revealed that at least two class teachers with less than one year's experience
responded to this section of the survey.
The mean for each item in Section 3.2 of the questionnaire was calculated to
provide a procedure to gain insights into the degree to which teaching approaches
classified as nontraditional were in use during each of the periods under
investigation, namely 1964-1968, 1969-1974, and 1975-1987. Items 43 to 46, which
reflect traditional teaching methods, were recoded as: Never (4), Seldom (3),
Sometimes (2) and Often (1). The means for Items 41 to 46 were plotted on
continua (Figure 4.5) to provide graphical representations of the data (see Appendix
E).
272
Response Rate
Survey forms were received from 49 of the 115 schools in the sample, which
constitutes a 42.6% response rate (see Table 4.3). Thirty-nine (39) of the 52
schools nominating Contact Persons, and 10 schools which did not reply to the
initial letter, returned questionnaires. As described previously, copies of the survey
instrument were sent to the 36 schools which did not reply to the initial invitation to
participate in the survey.
An analysis of the response rate of schools by band of school and educational
region is provided in Table 4.4. Two (2) of the 11 trial schools for Student
Performance Standards in mathematics, one from each of the Northern and North
Western regions, returned questionnaires; three questionnaires (5.1% of those
dispatched) were returned for analysis. In response to the initial letter, five trial
schools indicated that they did not wish to receive the survey instrument. Fifty-nine
(59) questionnaires were sent to the remaining six schools in the sample. This low
response rate precludes a meaningful analysis of data with respect to school
personnel who were involved with the trial of the Student Performance Standards.
Table 4.3
Schools Returning Questionnaires
Number of schools in sample:
Schools refusing to participate in survey:
115
27
52
39
75.0%
36
10
27.7%
TOTAL:
49
42.6%
273
The response rate for questionnaires by educational region and band of school
is presented in Table 4.6. Although the size of the sample of school personnel was
potentially about 1400, a two-stage reduction in sample size was in operation.
Firstly, not all schools in the sample chose to participateeither declining in
response to the initial letter or by not returning any of the questionnaires sent.
Secondly, not all teachers and administrators from each participating school chose
to complete and return the questionnaire. As de Vaus (1991) comments: "Although
we can ask the person who receives the mail questionnaire to pass it on to the
appropriate person, we cannot be sure that this happens" (p. 108); nor can we be
sure that the potential respondent is sufficiently interested to complete and return
the survey form.
Asterisks in Table 4.6 indicate cells from which no questionnaires were
received from schools selected as part of the sample26 of the 64 cells. However
an analysis of Table 4.6 reveals that the spread of questionnaires received does
encompass a range of geographic locations and sizes of schools. Despite this, an
analysis of the data by educational region or band of school is precluded, given the
magnitude of the row and column totals displayed in Table 4.6. Hoinville (1977,
274
Table 4.4
School Response Rate by Region and Band
Band of school
Region
Sunshine
Coast
Metropolitan
West
1
1
Metropolitan
East
10
1a
1b
3
3
2
2
3
1
3
1
4
3
3
1
5
2
Total
9
6
66.7
14
6
42.9
1
1
12
4
33.3
Darling
Downs
2
1
4
1
3
1
13
3
23.1
South
Western
2
2
1
1
7
3
42.9
2
1
3
3
2
1
1
1
Wide Bay
2
2
5
1
2
1
2
1
3
2
Capricornia
15
7
46.7
2
1
2
1c
2
1
Northern
10
3
30.0
North
Western
1
1
1
1c
5
2
40.0
Peninsula
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
11
5
45.5
2
1
1
1
2
2
24
8
33.3
17
5
29.4
16
6
37.5
28
13
46.4
13
4
30.8
4
3
75.0
South Coast
Total: Sent
Returned
Percent
Note.
13
10
76.9
11
6
54.5
8
4
56.0
115
49
42.6
Top line in each row: Number of schools in sample. bBottom line in each row:
Number of schools returning questionnaires. cTrial school for Student Performance
Standards in 1993.
275
Table 4.5
Analysis of Number of Questionnaires Returned
TOTAL questionnaires sent:
598
395
171
43.3%
203
29
14.3%
201
33.6%
cited by de Vaus, 1991, p. 73), suggests that the smallest subgroup should have at
least 50 to 100 cases for a meaningful subgroup analysis.
Analysis of Nonresponse
From Table 4.5 it is apparent that the nonresponse rate for the return of
questionnaires was high (66.4%). Nonresponse may lead to an unacceptable
reduction in sample size, particularly when missing values are accounted for during
analysis, and to bias (de Vaus, 1991, p. 73). With respect to the former, the number
of valid cases for the belief Items ranged from a low of 186 for Item 15 to 201 for
Items 4 and 11 (see Appendix C). The mean number of valid cases was 196.4. For
Current Teaching Practices, the mean number of valid cases was 173.4, a lower
mean as a consequence of this section not being relevant to all respondents. Nine
non-teaching principals and six deputy principals returned questionnaires.
Additionally, some respondents who identified themselves as class teachers may
not have had responsibility for a class at the time of the survey's completion. The
number of valid cases relating to Current Teaching Practices ranged from 170 for
Item 38 to 176 for Items 25 and 26.
Except for Items 4 and 11, the number of valid cases for each item was less
than the optimum range200 to 1000 cases for populations of 10,000 or
moresuggested by Alreck and Settle (1985, p. 89). However, "the size of the
population from which...the sample [was drawn] is largely irrelevant for the
276
Table 4.6
Questionnaire Response Rate by Region and Band
Band of school
Region
Sunshine Coast
Metropolitan
West
1
1
Metropolitan
East
10
*a
4
*
14b
7c
51
16
31
26
9
*
6
1
19
4
48
28
19
*
8
*
16
2
51
12
Total
109
49
45.0
93
34
36.6
8
8
83
22
26.5
Darling
Downs
1
1
2
2
4
4
24
*
30
*
61
7
11.5
South
Western
2
2
2
*
2
*
5
*
8
*
8
1
27
3
11.1
Wide Bay
2
1
7
6
8
4
16
9
16
*
Capricornia
2
2
6
1
9
4
11
3
16
8
8
*
52
18
34.6
2
1
3
1
8
5
8
*
9
*
Northern
30
7
23.3
North
Western
1
1
2
*
5
2
Peninsula
1
1
3
3
6
1
6
5
16
3
9
*
17
8
9
4
South Coast
49
20
40.8
8
3
37.5
41
13
31.7
19
12
Unknown
Total:
Sent
Returned
Percent
Note.
45
24
53.3
1
12
10
83.3
31
14
45.2
49
18
36.7
95
30
31.6
261
77
29.5
114
31
27.2
36
20
55.6
598
201
33.6
277
accuracy of the sample. It is the absolute size of the sample that is important" (de
Vaus, 1991, p. 71). A perusal of Tables 4.7 to 4.11 suggests that, for most items,
opinions and practices are skewed towards one end of the four-point Likert scale.
Assuming representativeness of the sample (see below), this suggests a measure
of homogeneity in the population of school personnel with respect to their beliefs
and practices. In such instances, smaller sample sizes produce similar degrees of
accuracy as compared to those required for samples from heterogeneous
populations. It is therefore considered reasonable to conclude that the numbers of
valid cases obtained are sufficient to allow meaningful conclusions to be drawn.
Henry (1990) suggests that "nonresponse creates a potential for nonsampling
bias that cannot be overlooked after the data has been collected" (p. 131).
However, in Alreck's and Settle's view (1985, p. 76), it is not possible to completely
eliminate such bias, and therefore some nonresponse bias needs to be tolerated.
One method for determining the potential impact of nonresponse on the conclusions
drawn involves detecting differences in the data obtained from questionnaires
received at different times. As Henry (1990) intimates, "no differences in the waves'
of responses can indicate that response bias is less likely. This assumes that late
responders may share characteristics with nonresponders" (p. 132).
A search for differences in response was restricted to items related to Beliefs
(Items 1 to 23) and Current Practices (Items 24 to 38). The receipt of
questionnaires approximated four waves of responses, namely survey instruments
identified as numbers 1 to 83 (Group 1), 84 to 129 (Group 2), 130 to 164 (Group 3)
and 165 to 201 (Group 4). A one-way analysis of variance, together with Bonferroni
multiple comparisons (Norusis, 1991, pp. 178-180), was undertaken to detect
differences among the grouped responses for each of Items 1 to 38. This method is
conservative in its approach to reducing the likelihood of a Type 1 error (Agresti &
Finlay, 1997, p. 447; Myers & Well, 1995, p. 181). For each pairwise comparison,
given that the survey responses were allocated to four groups, the observed
significance level was set at .05 6, or .008 approximately, for the difference to be
considered significant at the .05 significance level.
Table 4.7 reveals that statistically significant differences between pairs of
group means at the .05 level were detected for Items 13, 18 and 28, the first two
278
Table 4.7
Items for Which Significant Differences in Response were Observed, Based on Time
of Receipt
Item
Group Mean
F Ratio
F Prob
Grp 1: 3.07a
Grp 2: 3.16
Grp 3: 3.23
Grp 4: 3.41a
4.02
.01
Grp 1: 3.07b
Grp 2: 2.73b
Grp 3: 2.94
Grp 4: 3.06
2.94
.03
Grp 1: 3.31
Grp 2: 3.56c
Grp 3: 3.13c
Grp 4: 3.34
2.47
.06
Note.
a,b,c
being belief statements and the latter being one of the Current Teaching Practices
to which teachers were asked to respond. For Item 13, statistically significant
differences at the .05 level were detected between Groups 1 and 4. Given the
progressive increase in group means (see Table 4.7), together with Henry's (1990,
p. 132) assumption that late responders may share characteristics with
nonresponders, it is possible that the latter may more strongly agree with this
statement. For Items 18 and 28, the means for Groups 1 and 2, and Groups 2 and
3, respectively, were significantly different at the .05 level. Given this pattern, the
opinion of nonresponders may not be markedly different to that of those who
responded to the questionnaire.
As statistically significant differences were detected for only 3 of the 38 items
tested, it seems reasonable to assume that the opinion of nonresponders is likely
not to be greatly different from that of respondents. Hence, although the
nonresponse rate was 66.4%, the data collected may be cautiously considered
indicative of the beliefs and practices of Queensland state primary school teachers.
279
280
Table 4.8
Percentage of Responses Related to Beliefs About the Importance of Mental
Computation
Item
1.
2.
7.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Missing
0.5
6.0
37.8
55.2
0.5
The Years 1 to 10
Mathematics Syllabus
places little importance
on the development of
the ability to calculate
exact answers mentally.
6.5
8.3a
44.8
38.0a
43.3
49.1a
3.5
3.7a
2.0
0.9a
24.4
62.7
9.5
1.5
2.0
Note.
proposition that children should use the written algorithms for mental calculations
(Item 8), approximately 23% of respondents believe that children should use paperand-pencil algorithms when computing mentally (see Table 4.9).
In comparing the pattern of responses to Item 7 (see Table 4.8) and Item 3 (see
Table 4.9), the overall pattern of responses is similar. However, a greater
percentage of respondentsapproximately 23%consider written methods for
calculating to be superior to mental methods (Item 3). This, despite the strong
disagreement with the proposition that written methods are more useful outside the
classroom than are mental procedures (Item 7).
The mean responses for items relating to the beliefs of school personnel about
the nature of mental computation were: Item 32.89, Item 43.17, Item 52.63,
Item 63.17, Item 82.89, and Item 93.24 (see Appendix E for the standard
deviations of these means). The coding for Items 3, 5, and 8 was
281
Table 4.9
Percentage of Responses Related to Beliefs About the Nature of Mental
Computation
Item
3.
4.
5.
6.
8.
9.
Note.
Written methods of
calculating exact answers
are superior to mental
procedures.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Missing
16.4
56.7
18.9
4.0
4.0
8.5
65.7
25.9
50.2
52.8a
30.8
33.3a
6.5
5.6a
3.5
0.9a
10.0
61.2
27.4
1.5
58.2
57.4a
21.9
24.1a
1.5
1.9a
4.0
1.9a
6.0
63.2
29.9
1.0
Mental computation
encourages children to
devise ingenious
computational short cuts.
Calculating exact answers
mentally involves applying
rules by rote.
9.0
7.4a
14.4
14.8a
282
Traditional
Strongly
Disagree
1
Nontraditional
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree
2
3
4
||XX|XX|
Items:
3
8
4
6
9
Figure 4.1.
Position of means for items relating to the beliefs about the nature of
mental computation on a Traditional-Nontraditional continuum
283
Table 4.10
Percentage of Responses Related to Beliefs About the General Approach to
Teaching Mental Computation
Item
10. Emphasis on written
algorithms needs to be
delayed so that mental
computation can be given
increased attention.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Missing
5.5
59.7
25.9
5.5
3.5
14.4
57.2
25.9
2.5
5.0
70.6
22.9
1.5
6.0
a
3.7
63.2
63.9a
29.9
30.6a
1.0
1.9a
17.9
60.2
17.9
2.5
19.4
60.2
17.4
3.0
1.5
The mean responses for three of the items listed in Table 4.10 that may be
considered on a Traditional-Nontraditional continuum were: Item 102.32, Item
133.18, and Item 143.24 (See Appendix E). These are presented in Figure 4.2
and indicate that, except in relation to delaying the focus on written algorithms,
284
Traditional
Nontraditional
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
2
3
4
||X|XX|
Items:
Figure 4.2:
10
13
14
285
Table 4.11
Percentage of Responses Related to Beliefs About Issues Associated with
Developing the Ability to Calculate Exact Answers Mentally
Item
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
4.5
59.7
35.8
2.5
22.9
54.7
12.4
7.5
3.5
24.9
57.2
7.5
7.0
6.0
a
6.5
42.8
41.7a
37.3
40.7a
10.4
9.3a
3.5
1.9a
49.8
a
53.7
49.8
46.3a
0.5
10.0
9.3a
3.0
3.7a
2.0
2.8a
21.9
14.8a
63.2
69.4a
Missing
286
Item
21. During mental
computation sessions,
one approach to each of a
number of problems
should be the focus,
rather than on several
approaches to each of a
few problems.
22. Children should be
encouraged to build on
the thinking strategies
used to develop the basic
facts.
Note.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Missing
18.9
52.7
23.4
1.5
3.5
60.7
71.3a
38.3
27.8a
0.5
0.5
0.9a
respondents agreed and 35.8% strongly agreed (see Table 4.11). Ninety-nine
percent (99%) of respondents believe that children should be encouraged to build
on the thinking strategies used to develop the basic facts (Item 22). Complementing
the findings for Item 23 (see Table 4.10), 52.7% disagreed and 18.9% strongly
disagreed with the suggestion that it was better to focus on one approach to a
number of problems rather than focus on several approaches to each of a few
problems (see Table 4.11, Item 21).
Figure 4.3 presents a graphical representation of the means for the items listed
in Table 4.11, with the right-hand side of the continuumStrongly Agreereflecting a
nontraditional approach to the issues raised. The means for each of the items were:
Item 113.31, Item 152.16, Item 162.26, Item 172.45, Item 193.50, Item
203.06, Item 212.92, and Item 223.37 (see Appendix E). Items 15, 16, 17, 20,
and 21 were recoded to facilitate their placement on the continuum. The data
suggest that, except for issues related to introducing a mathematics lesson by giving
10 quick questions (Items 15 to 17), there is some agreement with constructivist
approaches to developing skill with mental computationthat is, children should be
given opportunities for discussing, comparing, and refining their strategies (Item 19),
287
and that their idiosyncratic strategies should be built upon those used to develop
basic fact knowledge (Item 22).
Traditional
Strongly
Disagree
1
Nontraditional
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree
||XXXX|XXX|
Items:
15
17
16
20
21
11 19
22
Figure 4.3.
288
Table 4.12
Percentage of Responses Related to Current Teaching Practices for Developing the
Ability to Compute Mentally for Middle- and Upper School Teachers
Item
Never
0.9
4.6
Note. N = 108.
0.9
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Missing
6.5
54.6
34.4
4.6
2.8
37.0
56.5
3.7
5.6
37.0
53.7
3.7
3.7
50.0
39.8
5.6
11.1
46.3
38.0
4.6
32.4
47.2
12.0
3.7
10.2
56.5
29.6
3.7
7.4
50.0
38.0
4.6
3.7
48.1
43.5
4.6
27.8
50.0
16.7
4.6
289
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Missing
38.0
38.9
18.5
0.9
3.7
0.9
14.8
49.1
30.6
4.6
1.9
5.6
40.7
47.2
4.6
17.6
26.9
35.2
15.7
4.6
12.0
47.2
34.3
6.5
Note. N = 108.
A further 46.3% sometimes employ this approach to develop the ability to calculate
exact answers mentally.
Approximately equal percentages of teachers allow children to decide the
method of calculation (Item 25) and to explain and discuss their mental strategies
(Item 26). Thirty-seven percent (37%) of teachers indicated that they sometimes
use both of these teaching approaches, whereas 56.5% and 53.7%, respectively,
often use these two approaches. The data for Item 25 is complemented by that for
Item 34 (see Table 12). These reveal that, whereas 18.5% of teachers of middleand upper year levels sometimes insist on children using the written algorithm for
calculating exact answers mentally, the majority rarely place this requirement on
their pupils38.9% seldom have children use the written algorithm and 38% never
insist on the use of this strategy. Nonetheless, the data for Item 36 (see Table 12)
indicate that many teachers still teach rules as a means for developing the ability to
calculate exact answers mentally. Only 1.9% of teachers indicated that this
290
approach was never used, with an additional 5.6% indicating that teaching rules for
mental computation is undertaken infrequently.
Approximately 90% of teachers allow children to work mentally during practice
of written computation (see Table 12, Item 27). This unexpectedly high percentage
suggests that many respondents may not have interpreted this statement as
meaning that written answers may not always be required for children who are able
to mentally calculate the operations planned as practice for the paper-and-pencil
algorithms. The prime focus of the number strand of the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics
Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a) is on developing the ability of pupils to
calculate using the standard written algorithm for each operation.
Although 32.4% of teachers seldom give several one-step questions and simply
mark the answers as correct or incorrect (Item 29), 47.2% sometimes, and 12%
often, use this approach. Analogous to these findings, 27.8% of teachers of middleand upper-school classes seldom emphasise speed during mental computation,
whereas 16.7% often do so and 50% sometimes place this emphasis during mental
computation sessions (Item 33). Most teachers require answers to problems solved
mentally to be recorded on paper (Item 30)56.5% sometimes require written
answers, and 29.6% often emphasise this requirement.
The responses to Item 31 reveal that an approach regularly used to develop
mental proficiency is to ensure that the thinking strategies used to support basic fact
development are used as a basis for calculating beyond the basic facts (Item 31).
Fifty percent (50%) sometimes use this approach and 38% often relate strategies for
calculating beyond the basic facts to the thinking strategies used to support their
development. Many teachersapproximately 16% often encourage children to
commit to memory number facts beyond the basic facts (Item 37). This occurs
sometimes in the classrooms of 35.2% of middle- and upper-school teachers.
However, 17.6% of teachers never require children to commit such facts to memory.
When encouraging the development of the ability to calculate mentally, teachers
often integrate the development of strategies for calculating exact answers mentally
with other areas of mathematics (Items 32 & 38). Approximately 48% of teachers
sometimes use mental computation as a means for revising and practising
arithmetic facts and procedures (Item 32). No teacher indicated that this was a
procedure that they never used. Further, the data for Item 38 reveal that 47.2% of
teachers sometimes incorporate spatial and measurement concepts in problems to
be calculated mentally. Opportunities are also provided for children to appreciate
how often they and adults use mental computation (Item 35), with approximately
291
Traditional
Nontraditional
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
|XX|XX|XXXX|
Items:
36 30
33
34
29
25
31
26
Figure 4.4.
292
293
Table 4.13
Percentage of Responses Related to Past Beliefs About Mental Computation
Degree of Importance
Item
None
Little
Some
Great
Unsure
Missing
39. For each period, how important did the syllabus consider the ability to
calculate exact answers mentally?
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
(b) 1969b - 1974 (PIM: 1st ed)
(c) 1975c - 1987 (PIM: 2nd ed)
1.2
2.2
9.4d
11.5e
71.9
88.5
6.3
18.8
9.4
13.9
49.1
72.2
9.4
13.9
13.2
18.9
7.5
13.5
39.1
70.8
7.5
13.5
10.6
34.2
40. For each period, how important did you consider the ability to calculate exact
answers mentally?
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
15.6
18.5
68.8
81.5
3.1
12.5
1.9
2.4
28.3
36.6
47.2
61.0
1.9
20.8
4.3
6.5
30.4
45.8
31.7
47.7
.6
32.9
Note.
1964 Syllabus: N = 32. b1968 Syllabus: N = 53. c1975 Syllabus: N = 161. dTop
line in each row: Percentage of number of cases. eBottom line in each row:
Percentage of valid cases, excluding unsure and missing categories.
36.6% during 1969-1974. Taking the percentage of teachers who placed some or
great importance on mental arithmetic, the data suggest that teachers may have
gradually placed less importance on this topic during these periods.
The data for Item 41 (see Table 4.14) reveal greater percentages of
respondents allowing children to decide the method for calculating exact answers
mentally during the periods 1969-1974 and 1975-1987 than during 1964-1968,
when the percentages for sometimes and often are considered together. This
teaching practice was never used under the 1964 syllabus by 16% of valid cases
compared to 5.3% and 1.9% under the first and second editions, respectively, of the
Program in Mathematics (Department of Education, 1966-1968, 1975).
294
Table 4.14
Percentage of Responses Concerning Past Teaching Practices Related to Mental
Computation
Item
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Unsure
Missing
41. Allowed children to decide the method to be used to arrive at an exact answer.
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
12.5d
16.0e
15.6
20.0
18.8
24.0
31.3
40.0
3.1
18.8
3.8
5.3
3.8
5.3
39.6
55.3
24.5
34.2
7.5
20.8
1.2
1.9
6.2
9.5
28.6
43.8
29.2
44.8
3.1
31.7
42. Allowed children to explain and discuss their mental strategies for solving a
problem.
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
9.4
12.0
18.8
24.0
18.8
24.0
31.3
40.0
21.9
3.8
5.0
7.5
10.0
35.8
47.5
28.3
37.5
3.8
20.8
1.9
2.7
8.1
11.7
28.0
40.5
31.1
45.0
.6
30.4
43. Gave several one-step questions and simply marked the answers as correct or
incorrect.
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
3.1
4.0
15.6
20.0
15.6
20.0
43.8
56.0
21.9
17.0
22.5
35.8
47.5
22.6
30.0
3.7
20.8
13.7
19.8
34.2
49.5
21.1
30.6
.5
30.6
18.8
25.0
46.9
62.5
25.0
7.5
10.3
35.8
48.7
30.2
41.0
3.8
22.6
13.0
19.6
31.1
46.7
22.4
33.6
.6
32.9
Note.
3.1
4.2
1964 Syllabus: N = 32. b1968 Syllabus: N = 53. c1975 Syllabus: N = 161. dTop
line in each row: Percentage of number of cases. eBottom line in each row:
Percentage of valid cases, excluding unsure and missing categories.
295
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Unsure
Missing
45. Insisted that children use the procedures for the written algorithms when calculating exact
answers mentally.
(a) 1964a - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
18.8
25.0e
21.9
29.2
18.8
25.0
15.6
20.8
3.1
18.8
b
(b) 1969 - 1974 (PIM: 1st ed)
15.1
20.5
30.2
41.0
22.6
30.8
5.7
7.7
5.7
20.8
c
(c) 1975 - 1987 (PIM: 2nd ed)
14.3
21.9
24.8
38.1
18.0
27.6
8.1
12.4
3.7
31.1
46. Placed an emphasis on teaching rules for calculating exact answers mentally
(e.g. divide by ten by removing a zero).
a
(a) 1964 - 1968 (1964 Syllabus)
3.1
4.2
28.1
37.5
43.8
58.3
3.1
21.9
b
(b) 1969 - 1974 (PIM: 1st ed)
1.9
2.5
37.7
50.0
35.8
47.5
3.8
20.8
4.3
6.6
36.0
54.7
24.2
36.8
1.9
32.3
c
(c) 1975 - 1987 (PIM: 2nd ed)
Note.
1.2
1.9
1964 Syllabus: N = 32. b1968 Syllabus: N = 53. c1975 Syllabus: N = 161. dTop
line in each row: Percentage of number of cases. eBottom line in each row:
Percentage of valid cases, excluding unsure and missing categories.
However, the difference between the percentage of respondents who often used
this approach during 1964-1968 and 1975-1987 is not marked, being 40% and
44.8% of valid responses, respectively.
The data for Item 42 follows a similar pattern to those for Item 41. Most
respondents, for each period, indicated that they sometimes or often allowed
children to explain and discuss their mental strategies for solving a problem (see
Table 4.14). However, the percentage of respondents indicating that they never or
seldom used this approach decreased under both editions of the Program in
Mathematics (Department of Education, 1966-1968, 1975). The percentage of
teachers who never used this approach decreased from 12% for the period 19641968 to 2.7% of valid responses under the 1975 edition.
Items 43 to 46 (see Table 4.14) reflect teaching practices classified as
traditional in this study. Although 56% of valid responses indicate that teachers
often gave several one-step questions and simply marked the answers as correct or
296
incorrect (Item 43) during the period 1964-1968, this had decreased to 30% and
30.6% for the periods 1968-1974 and 1975-1987, respectively. This decrease was
accompanied by a concomitant increase in the number of respondents who
sometimes used this approachfrom 20% of valid cases under the 1964 syllabus to
49.5% for the 1975 Syllabus.
The emphasis on speed when calculating exact answers mentally (Item 44)
decreased during the periods under investigation. An analysis of the percentage of
valid cases indicates that 62.5% of respondents often emphasised speed under the
1964 syllabus (see Table 4.14). This had decreased to 33.6% during the period
1975-1987 and was accompanied by an increase, from 8.3% (Item 44a) to 19.6%
(Item 44c) of valid cases, in the number of respondents who indicated that this
emphasis was seldom applied.
Although the data for Item 45 (see Table 4.14) reveal that many teachers
insisted on the use of the procedures for written algorithms, the majority either never
or seldom placed such an expectation on their pupils in each of the three periods of
interest. Whereas the percentage of valid cases indicating that they sometimes
insisted on the use of written procedures remained relatively constant25%, 30.8%,
and 27.6%, respectivelythe percentage who often placed this expectation on
children decreased from 20.8% under the 1964 syllabus to 12.4% during the period
of the second edition of the Program in Mathematics (Department of Education,
1975).
The emphasis placed on teaching rules for calculating exact answers mentally
decreased slightly during the three periods under investigation. However, it
remained an approach used by the majority of teachers. An analysis of data for
Item 46 (see Table 4.14) indicates that whereas the percentage of teachers who
often used this approach decreased from 58.3% to 36.8%, the percentage who
sometimes taught rules to calculate mentally increased from 37.5% to 54.7% for the
periods 1964-1968 and 1975-1987 respectively.
Figure 4.5 presents a graphical representation, on a traditional-nontraditional
continuum, of the means for the teaching practices focussed upon in Section 3.2 of
297
Traditional
Nontraditional
Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
1964 - 1968
1
2
3
4
|XXX|XX||
Items:
46a
45a
43a
44a
41a
42a
1969 - 1974
1
2
3
4
|XXX|X|XX|
Items
46b
44b
43b
45b
41b
42b
1975 - 1987
1
2
3
4
|XXX|X|XX|
Items:
46c
43c
44c
45c
41c
42c
Figure 4.5.
the survey instrument (see Appendix C). Following the recoding of Items 43 to 46 to
reflect a nontraditional orientation, the means for the period 1964-1968 were: Item
41a2.83, Item 42a2.87, Item 43a1.72, Item 44a1.56, Item 45a2.58, and Item
46a1.46. Those for 1969-1974 were: Item 41b3.18, Item 42b3.17, Item
43b1.92, Item 44b1.69, Item 45b2.74, and Item 46b1.55. For the third period
investigated, 1975-1987, the means were: Item 41c3.31, Item 42c3.27, Item
43c1.89, Item 44c1.86, Item 45c2.69, and Item 46c1.73 (see Appendix E).
The data suggest that during 1969-1974 there was a slight increase in the use
of teaching strategies that allowed children to decide the method of calculation (Item
41b), and to discuss and explain the mental strategies used (Item 42b). This trend
298
appears to have continued from 1975 to 1987 (Items 41c & 42c, respectively) (see
Figure 4.5). Over the three periods investigated, there is also a suggestion that
there was a slight decrease, represented by movement of item means towards the
nontraditional end of the continuum, in the use of three of the teaching approaches
classified as traditional, namely giving several one-step questions (Item 43),
emphasising speed (Item 44), and teaching rules (Item 46). With respect to the
remaining traditional approachusing the written algorithm to calculate mentally
(Item 45)little change in its use appears to have occurred across the three time
periods.
Table 4.15
Percentage of Responses Related to the Importance of and Participation in
Inservice Sessions on Mental Computation
299
Item
54. Do you consider it important
that inservice sessions on
mental computation be made
available to teachers.
55. Have you attended, during the
last three years, inservice
sessions in which Mental
Computation was a specific
topic for discussion.
Note.
Yes
No
Missing
37.3a
88.2b
5.0a
11.8b
57.7
14.4
84.1
1.5
Table 4.16
Sourcea of Inservice on Mental Computation During Period 1991-1993
Colleague
Note.
Administrator
Mathematics
Adviser
Tertiary
Lecturer
Other
3.4%
65.5%
24.1%
6.9%
300
1988), and Maths in the Mind (Baker & Baker, 1991). The last text, however, is one
which allows for the extension of its activities to mental calculation beyond the basic
facts.
Of the remaining resources, 25.3% were categorised as supporting the
development of Problem Solving strategies and 24.0% were classified General
Mathematics Texts. A range of resources relating to problem solving were listed,
with no item being cited by more than one respondent. Those categorised as
resources to support problem solving included Lateral Thinking Puzzlers (Sloane,
1991) and Creative Problem Solving in School Mathematics (Lenchner, 1983).
Sixteen (16) respondents28.6%indicated that they used the Years 1 to 10
Mathematics Sourcebook (Department of Education, 1987-1990) relevant to the
year level being taught. Other general mathematics resources commonly used were
Rigby Moving Into Maths (Irons & Scales, 1982-1986) by 10.7% of respondents and
Sunshine Mathematics (Baturo & English, 1983-1985) by 12.5%.
Resources which did not fit into the four main categories presented in Table
4.17 were classified as Other (21.1%). This category included inservice that had
been attended, calculator activities, concrete materialsmultilink, for exampleand
more general resources such as Making the Most of 20 Minutes (Cain, 1989).
Twenty-nine (29) of the 161 school personnel who responded to Sections 3.1
and/or 3.2 of the survey instrument (see Appendix C), concerning past teaching
practices, listed resources that they had used during the period 1964-1987. Twentythree (23) different resources were identified. Thirteen percent (13%) of these were
classified as referring specifically to Basic Fact development (see Table 4.17), and
17.4% were classified as relating to mental computation (see Table 4.19). However,
the majority47.8%were General Mathematics Texts. The resources categorised
as Other21.7%were primarily items of mathematics equipment a bead frame, for
example. The basic facts resources listed included
301
Table 4.17
Categorisation of Resources Listed by Respondents in Sections 2.2 and 3.3 of the
Survey Instrument
Resource Categories
Teaching
Practices
Mental
Computation
Basic Facts
Problem
Solving
General
Texts
Other
Currenta
18.3%
11.3%
25.3%
24.0%
21.1%
Pastb
17.4%
13.0%
47.8%
21.7%
Note.
Table 4.18
Textbooks Specific to Mental Computation Currently Used by Middle- and UpperSchool Teachers
Couchman, K. E., Jones, S. B., & Nay, W. (1992). Quick practice maths 2000 (Years 3-6).
Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.
Lewis, B. (1991). Mental arithmetic and problem solving (Years 3-7) (2nd ed.). Melbourne:
Longman Cheshire.
Nash, B., & Nightingale, P. (1992). Kookaburra mental activities (Books 1-6). Sydney:
Nightingale Press.
Parkes, A. A., Couchman, K. E., Jones, S. B., & Green, K. N. (1982). Betty and Jim mental
arithmetic (4th ed.). Sydney: Shakespeare Head Press.
Perrett, K., & Donlan, R. (1985). Breakthrough mental arithmetic (Years 3-6). Melbourne:
Methuen.
Perrett, K., & Whiting, E. (1972). The "Dux" series mental arithmetic (Books 1-6) (2nd ed.).
Melbourne: School Projects.
Petchell, D. L., & McDonald, M. K. (1980). Progress in mental arithmetic (Years 3-6).
Sydney: Primary Education Publications.
Basic Maths Facts (Oostenbroek, 1976) and an audio tape simply referred to as a
"tables tape. With respect to general texts, of the 29 respondents, 65.5% indicated
that they used texts published by William Brooks (Brisbane), particularly the
Mathematics Guide (Willadsen, 1970-1976). As one respondent commented, "Were
there any except Brooks [during this era]?"
302
Of the resources for which full bibliographic details were able to be determined
from the information provided by respondents, Table 4.18 presents those that are
currently being used to teach mental computation by middle- and upper-school
teachers. Six (6) texts relating to mental computation, listed by 10 respondents,
were not able to be definitively identified. The most commonly used text, by four
respondents, is that by Bob Lewis, Mental Arithmetic and Problem Solving (1991).
Except for two respondents, none indicated that they made use of more than one of
the resources identified.
Eight (8) of the 29 respondents (27.6%) who listed resources used under
previous syllabuses listed resources specific to mental computation (see Table
4.19). None of these respondents indicated that they used more than one of the
texts listed. Two listed Breakthrough Mental Arithmetic (Perrett & Donlan, 1985).
Table 4.19
Textbooks Specific to Mental Computation Used During the Period 1964-1987
Lewis, B. (1986). Mental arithmetic and problem solving (Years 3-7). Melbourne: Longman
Cheshire.
Perrett, K. & Donlan, R. (1985). Breakthrough mental arithmetic (Years 3-6). Melbourne:
Methuen.
Perrett, K., & Whiting, E. (1972). The "Dux" series mental arithmetic (Books 1-6) (2nd ed.).
Melbourne: School Projects.
4.3.3 Discussion
As stated in Section 4.3, the survey of Queensland state primary school
personnel was designed to provide insights into:
303
Such insights enable the data from the analysis of the nature and role of mental
computation within Queensland state school mathematics syllabuses, as presented
in Chapter 3 and Section 4.2, to be extended to the present. The integration of the
survey data with that from Chapters 2 and 3 is specifically undertaken in Chapter 6.
The purpose of this section is to draw conclusions with respect to the survey
questions, as delineated in Section 4.3.1. These conclusions form the basis for the
extension of the historical analysis to the present.
Limitations of Findings
It was concluded previously in this chapter, that although the nonresponse rate
was 66.4%, the data collected may be cautiously considered indicative of the beliefs
and current practices of Queensland state primary school teachers (see Analysis of
Nonresponse). This conclusion was drawn from an analysis of data obtained from
the four waves of questionnaire return. It was also demonstrated that the numbers
of valid cases obtained were sufficient to allow meaningful conclusions to be drawn,
at least with respect to the beliefs and current practices of Queensland state primary
school teachers.
The data obtained from Section 3 of the survey instrumentPast Teaching
Practicescan only be considered suggestive of the beliefs and practices which
prevailed during the period 1964-1987, particularly given the relatively few
respondents (32) for the 1964-1968 era. Although it was intended that the data be
representative of the views of teachers who taught at any time during 1964-1987, it
was not possible, prior to the sample being drawn, to identify those teachers who
had taught under the three syllabuses of interest.
It is recognised that self-selection introduces bias into the resultant sample of
school personnel. Although this source of bias may have been unavoidable, it does
necessitate cautious generalisation of the conclusions drawn from the survey.
However, this caution should be viewed in context with the intent of the studythat
is, to describe and to gain insights, rather than to explain.
Conclusions
The contemporary beliefs of, and the teaching practices employed by,
Queensland state school personnel reflect aspects of traditional and nontraditional
304
Question 1(a)(i):
Question 2(a):
305
enhance and capitalise upon the links between various number, space and
measurement concepts. Representative of this view is the following comment by a
Year 6 teacher: "Although mental computation is important, it is only one of many
mathematical strategies [sic] within the Queensland syllabus. Too many topics
mean essential topics are not emphasised as much as they probably should."
Question 1(a)(ii): Do the beliefs about the nature of mental computation reflect a
nontraditional view?
Figure 4.1 suggests that Queensland state primary school personnel tend
towards holding a nontraditional view of mental computation, albeit one that does
not appear to be strongly held. Traditional elements remain in their beliefs,
particularly with respect to the use of rules for calculating mentally (Item 5).
Although 91.6% of school personnel support the view that mental computation
encourages children to devise ingenious computational short cuts (Item 4, Table
4.9), 37.5% believe that calculating exact answers mentally involves applying rules
by rote (Item 5, Table 4.9). Approximately 92% of respondents supported the belief
that proficient mental calculators use personal adaptations of written algorithms and
idiosyncratic strategies (Item 9, Table 4.9). Nevertheless, approximately 23% of
teachers agreed with the proposition that children should use the algorithm for
written computation when calculating exact answers mentally (Item 8, Table 4.9).
Question 1(a)(iii): Do the beliefs about how mental computation should be taught
reflect a nontraditional view?
Two categories of items are relevant to this question. The first consists of items
concerned with the general approach to teaching mental computation (Figure 4.2,
Table 4.10), whereas the second involves more specific issues (Figure 4.3, Table
4.11). With respect to the first category, it can be concluded that school personnel
tend towards holding nontraditional views (see Figure 4.2). Table 4.10 indicates
that most respondents agreed with all items in this category, except for that relating
to the need for an emphasis on the written algorithms to be delayed so that mental
computation can be given increased attention (Item 10). The focus of the number
strand of primary school mathematics under the 1987 Syllabus is the development
of the written algorithms. As discussed in Chapter 2, the traditional sequence for
introducing computational procedures involves a focus on mental computation
306
Yes, it's great fun listening to how some students calculate their answers to
larger sums beyond the basic facts. The other students enjoy listening to
them as well but I'm not sure [that] they then adopt other students'
307
strategies. When the pressure is on, you tend to go with what feels natural.
(Year 4 teacher)
308
which mental computation was a specific topic for discussion (Item 55). "Current
methods emphasise problem-solving strategies, estimation. Mental computation for
exact answers is not a high priority" (Year 4 teacher).
Many of the issues raised in the survey are not necessarily specific to mental
computation, but relevant to mathematics teaching in general. As discussed in
Chapter 2, current developments in mathematics education suggest, inter alia, that
learning is enhanced where children are placed in problem solving situations, and
where active involvement and reflection are encourageda focus on the construction
of mathematical knowledge.
The Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Teaching, Curriculum and Assessment
Guidelines (Department of Education, 1987b, p. 4) advocates teaching mathematics
through problem solving. This approach uses problem solving as a focal point for
planning learning experiences in which children are required to apply their
mathematical knowledge to resolve the problems encountered. Associated with this
approach is the encouragement for children to discuss and reflect upon solutions
and the strategies used. Teachers and children have been encouraged to accept a
range of solutions and a range of strategies for arriving at particular solutions. Many
respondents listed resources more specifically related to problem solving in general,
rather than ones directly related to the development of the ability to mentally
calculate exact answers beyond the basic facts (see Table 4.17).
In commercial mathematics textbooks published during 1980s an emphasis has
been given to the role of thinking strategies for developing number fact knowledge.
This emphasis is also evident in the sourcebooks published by the Queensland
Department of Education, texts that operationalise the beliefs about how children
learn mathematics that are embodied in the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus
(Department of Education, 1987a). A focus on thinking strategies for obtaining the
basic facts, before introducing drill and practice, is believed to make the facts more
meaningful as well as easier for children to learn (Booker, n.d., p.11).
Question 2(b):
From Table 4.13 it is apparent that the perceived emphasis placed on mental
computation by the mathematics syllabuses diminished sharply with the introduction
of the first edition of the Program in Mathematics for Primary Schools (Department
of Education, 1966-1968). Whereas 88.5% of valid cases considered that the 1964
309
Mathematics Syllabus placed great emphasis on mental arithmetic (Item 39a), this
had fallen to 13.9% for the first edition of the Program in Mathematics (Department
of Education, 1966-1968) (Item 39b). Of the three syllabuses in operation during
the period 1964-1987, only the 1964 syllabus made specific reference to mental
arithmetic, as discussed in Section 4.2.
A similar pattern of results was obtained for Item 40 (see Table 4.13)
concerning the importance that teachers placed on mental computation during this
period. However, the level of importance that teachers gave to mental computation
remained relatively high under both the 1969 and 1975 editions of the Program in
Mathematics. Sixty-one percent (61%) and 47.7%, respectively, indicated that they
continued to place great importance on mental computation, even though the
syllabuses made no specific reference to the need to develop the ability to calculate
exact answers beyond the basic facts.
From Figure 4.4 it is evident that middle- and upper-school teachers employ
both traditional and nontraditional teaching practices when developing the ability to
calculate exact answers mentally. This finding parallels those that relate to the
beliefs about mental computation expressed by all respondents as well as by
middle- and upper-school teachers (see Tables 4.8, 4.9, & 4.10).
Children taught by middle- and upper-school teachers are permitted to decide
the method of calculation (Item 25, Table 4.12), and to explain and discuss the
strategies used (Item 26), teaching practices classified as nontraditional. Links are
made to the thinking strategies used to develop the basic facts. Thirty-eight percent
(38%) of middle- and upper-school teachers indicated that they often use this
approach (Item 31). Whereas 38% of middle- and upper-school teachers stated that
they never insist on children using the procedures for the written algorithms (Item
34), 18.5% indicated that this requirement was sometimes placed on children (see
Table 4.12).
Teaching practices classified as traditional that remain in the repertoire of
middle- and upper-school teachers include the practice of giving several one-step
questions and simply marking the answers as correct or incorrect (Item 29). Twelve
percent (12%) of respondents indicated that they use this strategy often, and 47.2%
revealed that they use it sometimes. In excess of half of the middle- and upper-
310
Question 3(a)(ii): Are the teaching approaches employed by middle- and upperschool teachers consistent with their stated beliefs?
311
belief that calculating exact answers mentally involves applying rules by rote (Item
5), 87.9% continue to teach rules for calculating exact answers mentally (Item 36).
The dissimilarity between some teaching practices and the beliefs that underpin
them may stem, at least in part, from the nature of teacher inservice which
accompanied the introduction of the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus
(Department of Education, 1987a). The inservice model was founded on Hall,
Teaching Practices
Traditional
Nontraditional
Never
1
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
2
3
4
|X|X|XXXX|
Items:
36
29
34
31
25
26
Beliefs
Traditional
Nontraditional
Strongly
Disagree
1
Disagree
Strongly
Agree
Agree
2
3
4
||XXX|XXX|
Items:
20
8
Recoded Items:
Matched Items:
Figure 4.6.
14
22
19
Means for selected teaching practices and the beliefs that underpin
them for middle- and upper-school teachers on a traditionalnontraditional continuum.
Wallace, and Dossett's (1973) Concerns-Based Adoption Model which posits that
teachers implementing an innovation move through a series of levels before fully
incorporating a particular teaching strategy, for example, into their repertoire of
pedagogical techniques (Dunlop, 1990a, p. 4). For this to occur, teachers not only
require knowledge about particular topics and associated teaching approaches, but
collegiate support during its implementation.
312
Mental computation was not a specific focus during the inservice which
occurred, nor was adequate in-classroom support available for teachers. Hence, it
may be that, whereas teachers became convinced of the need for certain changes
to occurfor example, that children should understand the processes involved when
calculating, rather than simply applying rules by rotethe implementation of these
beliefs has not occurred to any significant level, given the lack of knowledge and
support during the change process. Traditional approaches to mental computation
therefore remain in classroom practice. As one Year 4 teacher commented: "I enjoy
mathematics, know a lot of short cuts and teach these to my class."
Question 3(b):
313
might be taught meaningfully (Irons, Jones, Dunphy, & Booker, 1980). The
recommended approaches placed an emphasis on understanding, discussion, and
the need to explore alternative ways for deriving solutions. It is possible that the
recent emphasis given to these approaches may have influenced respondents'
recollections of the methods used to teach mental computation under earlier
syllabuses.
Although respondents indicated that nontraditional approaches were employed,
strategies classified as traditional in this study were more commonly used. There
was an emphasis on speed (Item 44), teaching rules (Item 46), and giving several
one-step questions and simply marking the answers as correct or incorrect (Item 43)
(see Table 4.14 & Figure 4.5). However, the use of these approaches decreased
slightly under each edition of the Program in Mathematics (Department of
Education, 1966-1968, 1975) (Figure 4.5), which paralleled the increased use of
methods classified as nontraditional discussed previously.
Question 4(a):
Question 5(a):
314
Each of the resources contains exercises from across the range of number,
space and measurement topics within the syllabus, although none is specifically
written to match the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education,
1987a). Various structures for the sets of questions are evident in the texts. For
example, Mental Arithmetic and Problem Solving: Year 6 (Lewis, 1991) employs a
range of topics which includes number facts, extended facts, money, factors,
measurement, and problems. Prominence is also given to the use of short
methodsfor example, to subtract by nine, subtract 10 and add one. In contrast,
Progress in Mental Arithmetic: Year 6 (Petchell & McDonald, 1980) presents sets of
examples based on a range of concepts grouped into four levels of difficulty within
each unit. For example, Levels 3 and 4, for "more competent children, include
items such as: "48c x 4" and "How many m tiles are required to tile an area 17m
by 8m?" (p. 21).
Indicative of the dominance of traditional texts to support mental computation
are the comments of two teachers. A Year 7 teacher commented: "It is almost
impossible to purchase books for this purpose. I rely on my own resources built up
for many years. Such a view gained support from a Year 6 teacher who noted that
"the older the book the better" as a resource to assist in teaching mental
computation. In contrast, another Year 6 teacher suggested that "any maths
resource can be used. [The] teacher modifies the resource to meet current needs.
Teachers should use common sense and make maths as everyday' as possible.
Support for nontraditional teaching approaches to mental computation are to be
found in some of the resources categorised as General Texts and in some
supporting the development of the basic facts. Nonetheless, the majority of the
resources classified as Other Than Specifically Relating to Mental Computation bear
no direct relevance to developing the ability to calculate exact answers mentally.
Sixteen (16) middle- and upper-school teachers indicated that they made use of
the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Sourcebook (Department of Education, 1987-1991)
relevant to the year level taught. The sourcebook for Year 5 provides
comprehensive support for a focus on developing thinking strategies for calculating
mentally beyond the basic facts (Department of Education, 1988, pp. 51-57). Ideas
315
for assisting children to extend basic fact strategies to mental operations with larger
numbers are included. However, the degree to which teachers actually apply these
ideas is not able to be determined from this study. As discussed previously, opinion
is divided (Item 2, Table 4.8) as to the importance placed on mental computation by
the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a), and, by
implication, by the Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Sourcebooks (Department of
Education, 1987-1991).
Maths in the Mind: A Process Approach to Mental Strategies (Baker & Baker,
1991), although primarily concerned with basic fact development, provides ideas for
developing mental strategies for calculating beyond the basic facts. In approach, it
is similar to the ideas presented by McIntosh (1988) in Volume 1 of the Mathematics
Curriculum and Teaching Program (Lovitt & Clarke, 1988), nominated by one Year 7
teacher as a resource used to support mental computation. The nontraditional
approach advocated by Baker and Baker (1991) emphasises that mental strategies
need not be specifically taught. Rather teachers should:
Question 5(b):
The degree to which conclusions can be drawn with respect to the resources
teachers used between 1964 and 1987 is limited by information having been
provided by only 29 of the 161 school personnel who responded to Section 3 of the
survey instrument. As revealed in Table 4.17, 17.4% of the 23 resources listed for
the period 1964-1987 related specifically to mental computation. Each of the texts
316
that was able to be identified from the bibliographic information provided (see Table
4.19) support traditional teaching approaches. These texts are ones that are
currently being used by middle- and upper-school teachers (see Table 4.18).
The text most commonly cited by respondents55.2%was a general
mathematics text, the Mathematics Guide (Willadsen, 1970-1976), initially published
to correspond to each stage of the Program in Mathematics for Primary Schools
(Department of Education, 1966-1968). This finding is consistent with that by
Warner (1981, pp. 76-77) who found that the Mathematics Guide (Willadsen, n.d.)
was the text most widely used by teachers of Years 5-7. Although it made no
specific reference to mental computation, its structure facilitated giving 10 quick
questions in such areas as the four operations to 100 and numeration.
Concluding Points
In conclusion, although the findings from this survey may not authoritatively
extend our understanding of mental computation in Queensland classrooms
between 1964 and 1987, it is reasonable to conclude that those relating to the
present, albeit late-1993, are representative of contemporary beliefs and practices.
Given that many teachers are yet to fully embrace mental computation as currently
envisaged, both in belief and practice, there is an urgent need for (a) significant
documentary guidance for teaching mental computation, and (b) teacher inservice
and classroom support, as recognised by the majority of respondents to the
questionnaire. Of relevance to meeting these needs was the abortive introduction
during the mid-1990s of the Student Performance Standards in Mathematics for
Queensland Schools (1994), one of the initiatives discussed in the next section.
4.4
317
318
319
320
321
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
322
Level 2:
Level 3:
323
Level 5:
324
Phase E
Phase F
325
327
CHAPTER 5
MENTAL COMPUTATION:
A PROPOSED SYLLABUS COMPONENT
5.1
Introduction
One conclusion that may be drawn from the analyses in preceding chapters is
328
329
of these factors in this chapter, and in Chapter 6, has been facilitated by the analysis
of Queensland syllabuses from 1860 (Chapter 3) and the data from the survey of
Queensland State school personnel (Chapter 4). Of relevance to the proposals
presented in this chapter, these analyses reveal that Queensland teachers have
tended to ignore syllabus recommendations with respect to calculating mentally,
partly as a consequence of the impreciseness in the terminology used, the poor
quality of teacher training, and the lack of appropriate professional development to
accompany the introduction of new syllabuses. Further, arising from the nature of
mental arithmetic embodied in the syllabuses prior to 1966, coupled with teacher
understanding of the 1987 Syllabus, and a commitment to teaching the standard
written algorithms, a tradition for encouraging students to devise their own mental
and written strategies remains to be developed. These factors suggest that ongoing professional development and support will be required to empower teachers
to emphasise mental computation, despite the inclusion of some nontraditional
techniques such as encouraging discussion in their teaching repertoires (see Table
4.12),.
This need, and that for significant documentary guidance, was revealed by the
analyses of survey data (Section 4.3) and recent curriculum initiatives (Section 4.4)
of relevance to mental computation in Queensland. Although aspects of the first of
these needs are analysed in this chapter, the primary focus is on the formulation of
proposals that may form a basis for incorporating specific references to mental
computation into future mathematics syllabuses. The proposals centre upon (a) a
sequential framework, embodying a mental-written sequence, for introducing
mental, calculator and written procedures, and (b) mental strategies appropriate for
focussed teaching at various year-levels. As a consequence of the critical nature of
the environment in which curriculum change occurs, these proposals have been
developed within a Queensland context. Nonetheless, given the similarities in
school mathematics across national boundaries, as reflected in the research
literature (see Chapters 1 & 2), it is considered that the proposals, and the
contextual features, have relevance for all teachers of mathematics.
330
331
place of standard written algorithms within the curriculum (Cockcroft, 1982, p. 75,
para 256; Lave, 1985, p. 175; Lindquist, 1984, pp. 602).
Additionally, in conflict with the proposition that mental computation involves
the development of flexible mental strategies (R. Reys, 1992, pp. 65-66), is the
belief of many teachers that calculating exact answers mentally involves applying
rules by rote (Table 4.9, Item 5). Such a belief, however, is not inconsistent with that
traditionally held by Queensland teachers, one that originated during the period
1860-1965 when mental arithmetic was viewed as the presentation of a series of
one-step oral questions. The focus was on obtaining correct answers, speedily and
accurately (see Section 3.7), rather than on the mental strategies employed. The
success of a lesson was dependent upon the number of questions correctly
answered (Gladman, 1904, p. 235).
If students are to develop confidence with mental computation, the change
process for school communities needs to be initiated without delay. Critical to this
process is the need for teachers to gain a clear practical understanding of how any
proposed changes might impact upon their beliefs and teaching practices (Lovitt,
Stephens, Clarke, & Romberg, n.d., p. 2). The development of a syllabus
component focussing on mental computation should assist teachers to ascertain the
potential personal impact that may ensue from the recommended changes to the
nature of computation within the primary mathematics syllabus.
In formulating and implementing a mental computation syllabus component,
mental computation needs to be considered from various perspectives. First, from a
global perspective, mental computation needs to be viewed as an integral part of the
whole school program, where the intent is the maximisation of links to the real-world
of the children so as to capitalise upon their idiosyncratic knowledge (see Section
2.10, Conclusion 7). Second, from a mathematics learning perspective, a focus on
mental computation needs to recognise that mental strategies are essentially ways
of thinking about mathematics (Cobb & Merkel, 1989, p. 80). The development of
flexible and resourceful approaches to manipulating numbers both reflects and
develops number sense, a key goal for school mathematics.
Third, from an operations curriculum perspective, the development of
strategies for calculating mentally is implicitly enmeshed with the development of
written and technological methods of calculation. Finally, from a calculation
perspective, mental computation needs to be considered in terms of the
332
333
teaching and assessment strategies are provided, little is included about expected
student outcomes. Schools and teachers have been left to formulate their own
standards for judging student progress (Grace, 1996, p. 11), with variability between
teachers, both within and across schools, as a consequence. An approach to
syllabus design which may assist in providing a focus on what students should be
able to do as a result of their learning is presented in Figure 5.1. However, an
analysis of the structure and organisation of future mathematics syllabuses (Stage
4) is considered beyond the scope of this study. Hence, this chapter is primarily
concerned with the relationships between Stages 1 to 3 and mental computation.
Goal/s
re student
learning
Stage 1
Figure 5.1.
5.2
Sequential
Framework
for learning
Stage 2
Outcomes
for each
aspect of
sequential
framework
Stage 3
Syllabus
Content
and
organisation
Stage 4
relating to the most appropriate ways to incorporate mental computation into the
curriculum (Carroll, 1996, p. 8; McIntosh, 1991a, p. 6, 1996, p. 273; Rathmell &
Trafton, 1990, p. 160; B. Reys, 1991, p. 9; R. Reys, 1995, p. 305) is characterised
by a degree of equivocalness (see Section 2.9.1). Nonetheless, irrespective of the
approach employed, teaching to promote the desired outcomes occurs within an
overall sequence for introducing computational procedures. This sequence may be
considered at two levels: (a) the order in which mental, technological, and paperand-pencil techniques are taught to children; and (b) the order in which particular
334
procedures associated with each of these methods are learned. Of these, the first
may have greater significance for mental computation.
335
the mathematics curriculum, a view not inconsistent with that of many current
Queensland primary school teachers (see Table 4.10). In the minds of teachers
were syllabus goals that stressed written calculationscalculations that were to be
achieved with speed and accuracy (Department of Public Instruction, 1952, p. 1).
This belief has persisted to the present, despite the focus on teaching methods
designed to promote an understanding of the concepts and processes being
learned. To support this development, current mathematics syllabuses, of which the
Queensland Years 1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987) is
representative, are characterised by: (a) a delay in the age at which particular
aspects of the four operations are learneda process first stimulated in 1930s in
Queensland (see Section 3.2.3) by reports such as that of Cunningham and Price
(1934), (b) clear distinctions being drawn between the concept of an operation and
the written algorithm, (c) the memorisation of basic facts being supported by insights
into the relationships between numbers gained from a focus on thinking strategies,
and (d) the standard algorithms taught being ones which may be logically and
mathematically linked to the use of appropriate materials, supported by the use of
consistent language.
Table 5.1 presents the operationalisation of these considerations, as embodied
in Queenslands 1987 Syllabus and its supporting documents. This
336
Table 5.1
Traditional Sequencea for Introducing the Four Operations with Whole Numbers as
Presented in the Mathematics Sourcebooks for Queensland Schools
Yearb
1
ADDITION
1. Addition concept
2. Recording addition
3. Addition factsThinking strategies
4. The tens facts
5. Standard written algorithmc
2-digit numbers, no regrouping
2-digit numbers, regrouping
3-digit numbers, regrouping
4-digit numbers, regrouping
SUBTRACTION
1. Subtraction concept
2. Recording subtraction
3. Subtraction factsThinking strategies
4. The tens facts
5. Standard written algorithmc
2- & 3-digit numbers, no regrouping
3-digit numbers, regrouping
4-digit numbers, regrouping
MULTIPLICATION
1. Multiplication concept
2. Recording multiplication
3. Multiplication factsThinking strategies
4. The tens facts
5. Standard written algorithmc
2-digit by 1-digit number, regrouping
2-digit by 2-digit numbers, regrouping
DIVISION
1. Division concept
2. Recording division
3. Division factsThinking strategies
4. Standard written algorithmc
2- & 3-digit 1-digit number, no regrouping
2- & 3-digit 1-digit number, regrouping
Note.
337
338
339
340
Table 5.2
Revised Sequential Framework for Introducing Mental, Calculator and Written
Procedures for Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication and Division
Year
1 -3
3-5
5-7
ADDITION
1. Addition concept
2. Non-written procedures
(a) Addition factsThinking strategies
(b) Addition beyond basic facts
Self-generated/shared mental strategiesa
Calculator strategies
3. Written procedures
Self-generated/shared strategies
Standard written algorithmb
SUBTRACTION
1. Subtraction concept
2. Non-written procedures
(a) Subtraction factsThinking strategies
(b) Subtraction beyond basic facts
Self-generated/shared mental strategiesa
Calculator strategies
3. Written procedures
Self-generated/shared strategies
Standard written algorithmb
MULTIPLICATI0N
1. Multiplication concept
2. Non-written procedures
(a) Multiplication factsThinking strategies
(b) Multiplication beyond basic facts
Self-generated/shared mental strategiesa
Calculator strategies
3. Written procedures
Self-generated/shared strategies
Standard written algorithmb
DIVISION
1. Division concept
2. Non-written procedures
(a) Division factsThinking strategies
(b) Division beyond basic facts
Self-generated/shared mental strategiesa
Calculator strategies
3. Written procedures
Self-generated/shared strategies
Standard written algorithmb
Note.
341
Reflecting the place of mental calculation within the calculative process (see
Figure 2.1), mental strategies refers to strategies for the calculation of both
approximate and exact answers. Such strategies take advantage of the structural
properties of numbers and the relationships between them. Their development and
that of number comparison and number sense occurs spirally, each "feeding on and
strengthening the others" (Threadgill-Sowder, 1988, p. 195). The ability to mentally
compute with truncated and rounded numbers is a prerequisite for computational
estimation (see Figure 2.2). Additionally, mental strategies used to refine estimates
may assist in the development of flexible approaches for calculating exact
answersgetting closer may ultimately result in turning approximate answers into
exact answers (Irons, 1990b, p. 1).
In concert with the analysis presented above and that in Section 2.5.3, the
emphasis for written procedures is placed on self-generated strategies. However,
reference to the standard written algorithm for each operation has been retained.
Despite the arguments for such algorithms not to be included, from personal
observations of previous syllabus changes, the reality of the classroom dictates that
they will continue to be taught, even should a revised syllabus advise otherwise.
The degree to which standard algorithms will continue to be taught is dependent
upon the effectiveness of the professional debate, supported by further research into
managing mathematics classrooms in which the focus is on self-generated mental,
technological, and written strategies.
By highlighting the position of the standard written algorithms within the
sequential framework (see Table 5.2), the standard algorithm for each operation
may come to be viewed as one of many possible ways for calculating in particular
contexts, rather than the way (Ross, 1989, p. 51), thus enhancing a child's capacity
to select appropriate methods for calculating in particular contexts. Most
importantly, the focus on non-written and non-standard written procedures may
assist in overcoming the belief of many adults and students, as identified by Plunkett
(1979, p. 3), that the concept of a particular operation and its standard paper-andpencil algorithm are synonymous. To support this focus, the placement of the
standard written algorithms within the sequence accords with the recommendation
of the Australian Education Council (1991, p. 109) that, in instances where these
algorithms continue to be taught, such teaching should occur later in a childs
schooling (see Tables 5.1 & 5.2).
342
The framework presented in Table 5.2 recognises that schools need to (a)
acknowledge that all students can learn, and (b) focus on differences with respect to
the way they learn and the rate at which learning occurs (Peach, 1997a, p. 1). Such
a focus requires a flexible approach to the allocation of particular learnings to
particular time periods. Hence, the elements of the sequential framework are not
year-level specific, an approach embodied in the Queensland 1987 Syllabus
documents (Department of Education, 1987a, pp. 14-30; 1987b, pp. 12-40). This is
in contrast to the traditional approach to syllabus design, which is characterised by
estimating the range of topics that can be learned during a particular school year.
However, it is an approach that is encapsulated in the Sourcebooks that accompany
the 1987 Syllabus. The structure of the year-level bands (see Table 5.2) is based on
recommendations contained in the Report of the Review of the Delivery of
Curriculum in Primary Schools (Avenell, 1996, pp. 8, 10). It is intended that the
overlapping bands provide for a smooth progression through the learnings related to
computation, while recognising that each class is characterised by students who
exhibit a range of achievement levels.
5.3
343
344
345
70 + 20 = 490 + (6 + 5) = 501
425 + 75 + 1 = 501
346
347
Of these alternatives, the third is the preferred. However, it is essential that the
selection of strategies for focussed teaching arises from the research literature,
rather than from a theoretical analysis of possible number combinations that may
appear in numerical situations, which appears to have occurred in the Framework
for Numeracy: Years 1 to 6 (National Numeracy Project, 1997) for primary schools in
England. The suggested mental strategies (Tables 5.3-5.5) are categorised by
operation to provide a direct link to the revised sequential framework (Table 5.2),
elements of which relate to self-generated and shared mental strategies for each
operation. Although teachers should place an emphasis on self-generated mental
strategies (Hunter, 1977a, p. 40), as implied by the second alternative, the purpose
of the proposed syllabus component is to provide some structure and guidance for
teachers to assist students to extend their repertoire of mental strategies (Carroll,
1996, p. 4; Cooper et al., 1996, p. 159; Heirdsfield, 1996, p. 146).
By placing limits on the size of the numbers involved, teachers should be
persuaded to allow students to extend their range of mental strategies through
encouraging them to devise alternative methods, rather than principally maintaining
the focus on a particular mental strategy to calculate with numbers of increasing size
or complexity, an approach not inconsistent with that embodied in Queenslands
1952 Syllabus (see Section 3.5.2). Although the intent of a syllabus Number strand
should be to promote proficiency with a range of computational strategies with a
range of number types, by limiting the proposed mental strategies to operations with
whole numbers it is intended to encourage proficiency with particular mental
strategies before they are applied to decimals, money, measures, or percentages.
The essence of a mental strategy is not dependent upon the size or complexity of
the numbers being manipulated. For example, the use of the strategy add parts of
the second number to calculate 548 + 332 (548 + 300 + 30 + 2) or 5.48 + 3.32 (5.48
+ 3 + .3 + .02) is not intrinsically different to its use when calculating 48 + 32 (48 +
30 + 2). Moreover, other aspects of an individuals store of numerical equivalents
and calculative plans (see Section 2.8.1) are developed and applied when
alternative strategies are employed. When using a compensation strategy, for
example, to find the sum of 48 and 32 this could be calculated as 50 + 30 = 80.
348
349
reducing the load on working memory (see Sections 2.8.3 & 2.8.4). The former,
together with organisation, is considered by Beishuizen (1993, p. 320) to be a basic
mental strategy for calculating with 2-digit numbers.
Cooper et al. (1996, p. 159) suggest that explicit exploration of holistic
strategies should be undertaken to reduce the emphasis on paper-and-pencil
procedures. The fourth heuristic strategy included for addition and subtraction,
compensation (see Tables 5.3 & 5.4), is classified by Heirdsfield (1996, p. 134) as a
holistic strategyone that requires the manipulation of numbers as single entities.
This strategy requires students to have a strong sense of the direction in which the
answer needs to be compensated if an undoing approach is employed. Markovits &
Sowder (1994, p. 15) report that this is particularly difficult for some Year 7 students
when using a compensation approach for subtraction.
The recommendations for addition and subtraction also include counting
strategies selected from those discussed in Section 2.7.4min of addends and min
of units (Resnick & Omanson, 1987, p. 66) for addition, and counting-on in twos,
tens and fives (Olander & Brown, 1959, p. 99) for subtraction. Except for min of
units, these strategies (see Tables 2.2, 5.3, & 5.4) require students to be operating
at least at Murray and Oliviers (1989, p. 6) second level of understanding 2-digit
350
Table 5.3
Mental Strategies Component for Addition of whole numbers beyond the basic facts
for Inclusion in the Number Strand of Future Mathematics Syllabuses for Primary
Schools
Year
1 -3
3-5
5-7
Counting strategies
min of addends
add 2-digit and 1-digit number
23 + 9: 24, 25, 26...32; 32
min of units
add 2-digit and 1-digit number
23 + 9: 29 + 3, 30, 31, 32; 32
Heuristic strategies
add parts of the first or second number
add two 2-digit numbers
46 + 38: 46 + 30 = 76, 76 + 8 = 84
46 + 38: 40 + 38 = 78, 78 + 6 = 84
incorporation
add two 2-digit numbers
39 + 25: 30 + 20 = 50, 50 + 9 + 5 = 64
organisation
add two 2-digit numbers
58 + 34: 50 + 30 = 80, 8 + 4 = 12, 80 + 12 = 92
compensation
add two 2-digit numbers
28 + 29: 30 + 30 = 60, 60 -2 -1 = 57
28 + 29: 30 + 27 = 57
numbers. Each builds upon strategies used to develop basic fact knowledge for
addition and subtraction, particularly count-on, and on number knowledge
developed through counting in twos, tens and fives. Min of addends, classified as
an elementary counting strategy, constitutes one from which the various strategies
classified as counting in larger units may be developed (see Table 2.2). It is a
351
Table 5.4
Mental Strategies Component for Subtraction of whole numbers beyond the basic
facts for Inclusion in the Number Strand of Future Mathematics Syllabuses for
Primary Schools
Year
1 -3
3-5
5-7
Counting strategy
counting-on in twos/tens/fives
subtract 2-digit number from 2-digit number
38 - 34: 36, 38; 4
71 - 44: 54, 64, 74; minus 3; 27
57 - 35: 40, 45, 50, 55; plus 2; 22
Heuristic strategies
subtract parts of the second number
subtract 2-digit number from 2-digit number
33 - 16: 33 - 10 = 23, 23 - 6 = 17
incorporation
subtract 2-digit number from 2-digit number
51 - 34: 50 - 30 = 20, 20 + 1 = 21, 21 - 4 = 17
organisation
subtract 2-digit number from 2-digit number
46 - 23: 40 - 20 = 20, 6 - 3 = 3, 20 + 3 = 13
46 - 28: 40 - 20 = 20, 10; 16 - 8 = 8, 10 + 8 = 18
compensation
subtract 2-digit number from 2-digit number
86 - 38: 88 - 40 = 48
strategy to which many students are likely to regress when required to compute with
unfamiliar numbers (Murray & Olivier, 1989, p. 4).
Min of units is a strategy that relies on an ability to recognise the magnitude of
the numbers of units involved, and to exchange these as necessary, a strategy that
requires an understanding of numeration characteristic of Murray and Oliviers
(1989, p. 6) third level. It is this level which provides the conceptual basis for the
use of heuristic strategies (Murray & Olivier, 1989, p. 6). Hence, this strategy may
be difficult for some students in Years 1 to 3 (see Table 5.3). Further, using a counton in twos, tens or fives strategy for subtraction may also be difficult for many
352
353
Table 5.5
Mental Strategies Component for Multiplication and Division of whole numbers
beyond the basic facts for Inclusion in the Number Strand of Future Mathematics
Syllabuses for Primary Schools
Year
1 -3
Students should be able to use:
MULTIPLICATION
general factoring
multiply 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit number
15 x 8: 5 x 3 x 2 x 4, 10 x 12 = 120
60 x 15: 60 x 5 x 3, 300 x 3 = 900
additive distribution
multiply 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit number
23 x 4: 20 x 4 + 3 x 4, 80 + 12 = 92
21 x 13: 20 x 13 + 1 x 13, 260 + 13 = 273
subtractive distribution
multiply 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit number
98 x 8: 100 x 8 - 2 x 8, 800 - 16 = 784
19 x 13: 20 x 13 - 1 x 13, 260 - 13 = 247
half-and-double
multiply 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit number
42 x 5: 21 x 10 = 210
60 x 15: 30 x 30 = 900
aliquot parts
multiply 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit number
14 x 5: 14 x (10 2), (14 x 10) 2, 140 2 = 70
48 x 25: 48 x (100 4) = (48 4) x 100 = 12 x 100 = 1200
DIVISION
general factoring
divide 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit divisor
90 15: 90 3 5, 30 5 = 6
additive distribution
divide 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit divisor
64 4: 60 4 + 4 4 = 15 + 1 = 16
78 15: 60 15 + 18 15 = 4 + 1 rem 3 = 5 rem 3
subtractive distribution
divide 2-digit number by 1- or 2-digit divisor
76 4: 80 4 - 4 4 = 20 - 1 = 19
3-5
5-7
354
A third factoring strategy, aliquot parts, has also been included in the
recommendations (see Table 5.5). This strategy draws upon an individuals
understanding of special products, an essential component of mental multiplication,
which refers to those products that are easily found by multiplying by a power of 10
or a multiple of a power of 10 (Hazekamp, 1986, p. 117). This interpretation of
aliquot parts contrasts with that expressed in the 1930 and 1952 Syllabuses (see
Section 3.5.2) where, as traditionally included as one of the essential short methods
of mental calculation, the emphasis was on aliquot parts of a pound, thus reflecting
mental arithmetics use as a book-keeping tool.
Aliquot parts, together with additive and subtractive distribution, was found to
be the most difficult strategy for multiplication for Year 5 students by B. J. Reys et al.
(1993, p. 310). Nonetheless, a form of the latter was one frequently used by Year 2
and 3 students who were encouraged to explore division through a constructivist
approach which emphasised experimentation and discussion (Murray et al., 1991, p.
54). Both of these distribution strategies have been successfully taught to Year 6
students for mental multiplication (Gracey, 1994, pp. 68, 73).
Despite the lack of research support, it is considered reasonable to propose
that general factoring and additive distribution should also be a focus for the
development of mental strategies for division (see Table 5.5). General factoring is
closely linked to number fact knowledge for multiplication and division, and additive
distribution is considered to be the calculative drafthorse of expert mental
calculators (Hope, 1985, p. 358). Nonetheless, exponential and iterative factoring,
and fractional and quadratic distribution (see Table 2.4) have not been included in
the recommendations for focused teaching. Although these strategies are also used
by exceptional mental calculators (Hope, 1985, pp. 361-362, 365-368; Hope &
Sherrill, 1987, pp. 102-103), they are not widely reported in the literature. More
importantly, their complexity removes them from those easily understood by primary
school students.
5.4
Concluding Points
Prior to the implementation of the suggestions contained in the revised
sequential framework (Table 5.2), and in the proposed mental strategies component
(Tables 5.3-5.5), a number of points need to be taken into consideration. With
respect to the former, as previously intimated, the implementation of a mental-
355
356
CHAPTER 6
MENTAL COMPUTATION:
CONCLUSIONS and IMPLICATIONS
6.1
357
358
computation across the range of time periods considered, (b) an outline of the
implications these conclusions hold for syllabus development, and (c) an analysis of
the aspects of mental computation that require further theoretical and empirical
investigation (see Section 1.4.2). The data on which these conclusions,
recommendations, and implications have been based were obtained from the review
of the pedagogical, socio-anthropological and psychological literature relevant to
mental computation (Chapter 2), and analyses of mental computation in Queensland
primary schools from past and contemporary perspectivesthrough an examination
of archival material (Chapter 3), and the analysis of a postal, self-completion
questionnaire (Chapter 4).
6.2
function, and teaching methods associated with the mental calculation of exact
answers beyond the basic facts, from theoretical and Queensland perspectives.
The conclusions which have been drawn need to be interpreted within the confines
of the historical and survey data obtained. The former were derived from syllabus
documents, textbooks, and the recorded beliefs and opinions of Departmental
personnel, primarily the annual reports of senior Departmental officers and
publications of the Queensland Teachers' Union. Taken together, these documents
have provided a comprehensive source from which an understanding of both the
intent and practice related to mental arithmetic has been obtained for the period
1860-1965.
As noted in Chapter 4, the data applying to 1965-1987 may only be considered
suggestive of the beliefs and practices which prevailed during that period, as few
respondents had taught under the 1964 Syllabus or the first edition of the Program
in Mathematics (Department of Education, 1966-1968). However, with respect to
the beliefs and practices related to the current syllabus, which was formally
implemented in 1988, it was concluded that the numbers of valid cases were
sufficient to permit meaningful conclusions to be drawn, despite the non-response
rate being relatively high (see Section 4.3.2). Further, based on anecdotal evidence
obtained from some Departmental Education Advisers (Mathematics) during 1996, it
359
is probable that the pattern of beliefs and practices in evidence during 1993 largely
remains unchanged. It was their opinion that mental computation had received
negligible attention during inservice related to the Student Performance Standards
conducted in 1994 and 1995, despite such calculation being emphasised in the
Standards for Number (Student Performance Standards, 1994, pp. 28, 42, 58, 72).
In presenting the conclusions which may be drawn from this study, it is
intended to provide a summary of key similarities and differences between the
beliefs and teaching practices related to mental computation currently advocated by
mathematics educators, and those of Queensland teachers across the eras
investigated. Consideration has been given to: (a) the emphasis placed on the
mental calculation of exact answers, (b) the roles ascribed to such calculation, (c)
the nature of these calculations, and (d) the approaches to teaching mental
computation.
360
documents and in the manner in which calculative methods are taught. The
recommendations outlined in Chapter 5 are designed to aid in the achievement of
this goal.
Prominence was given to the calculation of exact answers mentally in all
Queensland syllabuses from 1860 to 1964, albeit under various headings, which
included mental exercises, mental, mental work, oral work, mental and oral work,
oral arithmetic and mental arithmetic. From that of 1904, each syllabus emphasised
that "mental calculations should be the basis of all instruction" ("Schedule XIV,
1904, p. 201). The 1914 and 1930 Syllabuses suggested that "new types of
problems should invariably be introduced in this way" (Department of Public
Instruction, 1914, p. 61; 1930, p. 31), whereas the 1952 Syllabus stressed that "all
written work should be preceded by introductory oral exercises" (Department of
Public Instruction, 1952b, p. 2).
Despite the prominence given to mental arithmetic in the syllabus documents
and the exhortations of District Inspectors of Schools for teachers to implement their
intent, the generally low standard of mental calculation was most commonly
attributed to its not receiving sufficient regular and systematic treatment during the
period 1860-1965. Mental arithmetic appeared to be the bte noir of many teachers
("Mental Arithmetic, 1927, p. 18), an outcome of the characteristics ascribed to it
and of the ways in which it was taught. Nonetheless, it can be concluded that
mental arithmetic received some emphasis by teachers during the period 18601965.
Somewhat paradoxically, although the Program in Mathematics (Department of
Education, 1966-68, 1975) did not give mental arithmetic the prominence of earlier
syllabuses, the survey data suggest that middle- and upper-school teachers
continued to place importance on such calculation. However, this emphasis
progressively decreased from 1969 to 1987 (see Table 4.13). Additionally, whereas
approximately 53% of middle- and upper-school teachers agreed that the 1987
Syllabus places little emphasis on the development of the ability to calculate exact
answers mentally (see Table 4.8), 89% indicated that they at least sometimes
focused specifically on developing the ability to calculate exact answers mentally
beyond the basic facts (see Table 4.12). However, in so doing, teaching practices
classified as traditional in this study continue to be integral to the range employed
361
(see Figure 4.4), thus placing limits on the degree to which children are developing
flexible, idiosyncratic mental strategies.
362
mathematics and that used outside the classroom is bridged (Willis, 1990, p. 9). An
emphasis on the processes involved in mental computation could provide that
bridge. Folk mathematics is essentially mental (Maier, 1980) and often involves the
manipulation of non-standard units using invented strategies (Lave, 1985, p. 173).
Hence, in McIntosh's (1990a, p. 37) view, mental computation is the most readily
available means by which an understanding of how numbers generally behave may
be gained, a belief supported by many current school personnel (see Table 4.9).
While occasional recognition was given to mental arithmetic as a means for
"making scholars think clearly and systematically about number" ("Teaching Hints:
Arithmetic, 1908, p. 15), the primary pedagogical function of mental work during the
period 1860-1965 was to familiarise students with the arithmetical operations prior to
an emphasis on paper-and-pencil calculation. This mental-written sequence was
encapsulated in the 1904 Syllabus by its stressing that "the pupils should be made
familiar by mental exercises with the principles underlying every process before the
written work is undertaken" ("Schedule XIV, 1904, p. 201), a sequence that was
embodied in the spiral nature of the 1930 Syllabus. However, the failure on the part
of teachers to sufficiently model their mental arithmetic examples on the written work
that was to follow was a regular criticism of District Inspectors in their annual
reports.
Mental work was also considered to be an effective means for cultivating speed
and accuracy in new work and for the revision of the arithmetic procedures (Board of
Education, 1937, p. 513; Cochran, 1960, p. 12; Mutch, 1916, p. 62). However, such
a focus possibly contributed to the belief that mental arithmetic entailed the
presentation of a series of often one-step examples, the focus of which was the
gaining of correct answers, the traditional view of mental computation, as defined in
this study.
It is with respect to the role of mental arithmetic as a means for "improving the
tenacity of the mind" (Wilkins, 1886, p. 40) that sharp distinctions may be drawn
between past beliefs and those currently advocated by mathematics educators.
Nonetheless, aspects of this traditional view would appear to remain in the minds of
many Queensland teachers and administrators. Approximately 67% of respondents
supported the view that "children's mental processes are sharpened by starting a
mathematics lesson with ten quick questions to be solved mentally" (see Table
4.10).
363
Such a view has as its origins the tenets of formal discipline which were
espoused particularly in the 19th century. This theory held that the mind was
composed of a number of distinct powers or faculties, including memory, attention,
observation, reasoning and will (Kolesnik, 1958, p. 6). Late last century, Robinson
(1882) had maintained that the value of giving complex calculations, beyond the
requirements of the various syllabuses of the period, was "the formation of a power
of concentrating all the faculties on the performances of an allotted task...[so that]
the mind... [would] prove capable of any amount of labour upon other tasks" (p.
178). Such a belief resulted in mental arithmetic being considered essentially as the
"working [of] certain hard numbers in the shortest time by the shortest method"
("Mental Arithmetic: A Few Suggestions, 1910, p. 176).
Despite the discrediting of these beliefs early in the 20th century, and
statements by senior Departmental officers affirming their belief that there is no such
thing as general mental training, and that learning in one subject cannot be
transferred to another (Edwards, 1936, p. 16), teachers and inspectors retained their
beliefs in the role of mental arithmetic as a means for quickening the intelligence,
developing judgement, improving reasoning (Baker, 1929, p. 281; Mutch, 1924, p.
40) and for enhancing an individual's ability to concentrate on mathematical tasks
(Martin, 1916, p. 135). The maintenance of these beliefs was supported by the
influence of the English view of arithmetic, which represented arithmetic as logic
(Ballard, 1928a, p. xi). Hence, mental arithmetic was judged to be the means by
which children were trained to think and reason: "Intelligence in Arithmetic should be
secured through the medium of mental exercises" (Bevington, 1925, p. 83), with
accuracy in thinking and reasoning of paramount importance (Martin, 1920a, p. 81).
Nevertheless, Burns (1973, p. 4) concluded that most teachers were primarily
concerned with imparting factual knowledge. Hence, their concern was almost
exclusively with memory.
364
365
366
367
strategies (Cooper et al., 1996, p. 159). The strategies highlighted are those
counting and heuristic strategies (Tables 2.2 & 2.4) considered accessible for most
children in each of the three year-level clusters (Tables 5.3-5.5). These strategies
contribute to and draw upon a students sense of number.
As B. J. Reys et al. (1993, p. 314) have observed, mental computation can
provide numerous opportunities for the development of mathematical thinking.
However, it requires regular and systematic practice. District Inspectors of Schools
prior to 1965 often exhorted teachers to provide additional opportunities for practice
in mental arithmetic. Preferably this was to be undertaken for short periods in the
mornings when children's minds were fresh (Baker, 1929; Drain, 1941, p. 2;
Teaching Hints, 1908, p. 15). Lessons were characterised by rapid question
delivery, with the profit generally considered to be in the number of questions
answered correctly (Gladman, 1904, p. 215). Martin (1916) advocated that
explanations should be kept to a minimum as a means for ensuring a "concentrating
of the mind" (p. 135).
This contrasts with current beliefs about teaching mental computation, the
essence of which is the focus on assisting children to see how to calculate mentally.
The object is to play with numbers, to explore their relationships (C. Thornton,
1985, p. 10). Hope (1985, p. 372) and Olander and Brown (1959, p. 109) have
observed that proficient mental calculators exhibit a passion for numbers, which is
reflected in the degree to which calculating mentally is practised.
Elements of the traditional approach remained in teachers' repertoires following
the introduction of the Program in Mathematics (Department of Education, 1967a,
1968) in Grades 4 to 7 during 1968 and 1969, albeit with decreasing emphasis
during the use of this syllabus and its 1975 revision. The survey data analysed in
Chapter 4 revealed that middle- and upper-school teachers continued to emphasise
speed and the use of rules to calculate mentally during the periods 1969-1974 and
1975-1987 (see Table 4.14). Similar findings were found for those who were
classroom teachers in 1993, with the majority also indicating that they, at least
sometimes, gave several one-step questions and simply marked the answers as
correct or incorrect (see Table 4.12). Essential to the retention of these approaches
was the nature of the textbooks identified by teachers as ones used to support
mental computation (see Table 4.18).
368
These findings with respect to traditional practices were tempered by middleand upper-school teachers indicating that they also used constructivist approaches
to developing skill with mental computation. The majority disclosed that they, at
least sometimes, allowed children to decide on which mental strategy to employ,
explain and discuss their strategies, and relate methods for calculating beyond the
basic facts to the thinking strategies used in their development (see Table 4.12).
Overall, the teaching practices of contemporary classroom teachers tend to reflect
nontraditional approaches to developing mental computation skills (see Figure 4.4).
Nonetheless, this conclusion needs to be considered cautiously. Although there
was some consistency between their beliefs about how mental computation should
be taught and the teaching practices that they employed, many respondents
appeared to be focused on basic facts rather than on more complex mental
calculations (see Table 4.17). Further, their apparent acceptance of constructivist
approaches may derive, not from an understanding of mental computation per se,
but from an acceptance of the principles of teaching mathematics embodied in the
1987 Syllabus and its supporting documents. "Discussion between the teacher and
students and between the students themselves, for example, is listed as one of six
recommended approaches for teaching mathematics (Department of Education,
1987b, p. 3).
6.3
369
370
371
needs to occur in the wider context of reanalysing their beliefs about mathematics
and mathematics teaching.
In common with the United States' Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for
School Mathematics (NCTM, 1989, p. 9), a concern to encourage teachers to adopt
conceptual rather than a calculational orientation (Thompson, Philipp, P. W.
Thompson, & Boyd, 1994, p. 86) for teaching mathematics is embodied in the Years
1 to 10 Mathematics Syllabus (Department of Education, 1987a), the Years 1 to 10
Mathematics Teaching, Curriculum and Assessment Guidelines (Department of
Education, 1987b) and in A National Statement on Mathematics for Australian
Schools (AEC, 1990). Such an orientation is in harmony with the current view of
mental computation and how it should be taught. Thompson et al. (1994) contend
that "conceptually oriented teachers focus children toward a rich conception of
situations, ideas and relationships among ideas" (p. 86)key factors in developing
and being able to apply flexible mental strategies.
Making this shift requires a depth of reflection by teachers on the images and
outcomes of mathematics and mathematics teaching. The Professional Standards
for Teaching Mathematics (NCTM, 1991, p. 160) emphasises that opportunities
need to be provided for teachers to "examine and revise their assumptions about
the nature of mathematics, how it should be taught, and how students learn
mathematics" (p. 160). Of significance for the implementation of new syllabuses, is
the recognition that any recommended changes to teaching practices will not
substantially impact upon what occurs in schools should the examination and
revision of these assumptions not occur (D'Arcy, 1996, p. 1). This is particularly
relevant during periods of system initiated change, which is usually perceived as
being imposed upon teachers rather than teacher initiated.
Opportunities for teachers to become familiar with the issues related to mental
computation need to occur in context with viewing teacher change as a process of
individual growth or learning (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 1994, pp. 158-159), a process
encapsulated by Clarke and Peters (1993, p. 170) Dynamic Model of Professional
Growth. This multidimensional model recognises, in accordance with that of Guskey
(1985, p. 58), that significant changes to teacher beliefs and attitudes only occur
after valued learning outcomes have arisen from experimentation with changed
classroom practices. Of significance to gaining teacher acceptance of the
recommended changes to teaching computation is the recognition that the desired
372
learning outcomes, particularly the emphasis on self-generated mental and paperand-pencil strategies, are in sharp contrast to the current emphasis on standard
written algorithms.
Although teachers adapt rather than adopt new teaching practices (Clarke,
1994, p. 46; Fennema & Franke, 1992, p. 162), Doyle and Ponder (1977, p. 8)
caution that classroom practices radically different from common practice are
unlikely to be successfully implemented. Additionally, it needs to be recognised that
teachers have passions about their classroom practices and about the expectations
for change placed upon them (Weissglass, 1994, p. 78). Hence, for the desired
changes to occur, it is essential that teachers are assisted in the development of a
clear vision (Lovitt et al., n.d., p. 2), in practical terms, of how a focus on mental and
written idiosyncratic strategies within a mental-written sequence may impact upon
their current teaching practices. This implies that an essential component of any
professional development program is the facilitation of teacher reflection, a process
for which time is typically limited during the normal school day (Clarke, 1994, p. 40).
On-going support, including that in the classroom, is critical to the change
process (Guskey & Sparks, 1991, p. 73; Joyce & Showers, 1980, p. 384). As
Thompson et al. (1994, p. 90) note, once committed to a conceptual orientation,
many teachers lose their reliance on resources such as worksheets and textbooks
as well as on their repertories of familiar teaching practices. Such an experience is
threatening due to their loss of a sense of efficacy, and consequently is a major
obstacle to change. The design of professional development programs, therefore,
needs to have as a key component procedures which recognise that success in
making the desired changes of itself brings about a reconceptualisation of a
teacher's sense of efficacy (Smith, 1996, p. 394). This is a view supportive of the
belief that improvements in student learning arising from changed practices are
critical to the adoption of the beliefs and attitudes which underpin those practices.
For teachers to become committed to the recommended changes to the
approach to developing computational skill, these beliefs and attitudes must become
an essential part of a teachers professional belief system (Clarke & Peter, 1993, p.
174). This necessitates ongoing classroom assistance (Guskey, 1985, p. 59), and
enhanced collegial relationships to provide emotional support during the change
process. Change is not only a source of anxiety for teachers arising from the threat
to their sense of efficacy, but also may occur in context with other sources of anxiety
373
with which they may be faced (Weissglass, 1994, p. 71)sources such as those
related to an increased emphasis on school-based management, and using
technology in classrooms, the latter being a source that has implications for what
mathematics is to be learned in school, and how it is to be taught.
6.4
374
identified and analysedeffects not only related to student learning, but also
those related to teacher and parent attitudes.
The hypothesised mental strategies syllabus components for the four
operations beyond the basic facts (Tables 5.3-5.5) that were based on the
above models. Prior to the incorporation of these components in any future
mathematical syllabus or professional development programs, research,
similar to that by Gracey (1994), for example, needs to be undertaken to
determine their appropriatenessto the child, to the development of
proficiency with mental computation, and to the models, and data which
underpin them.
375
376
REFERENCES
Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (1997). Statistical methods for the social sciences (3rd ed.).
Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Albert State School Staff. (1947, August 8). Notes on staff discussion concerning
recommendations for syllabus revision. Queensland State Archives. A/18581.
Allinger, G. D., & Payne, J. N. (1986). Estimation and mental arithmetic with percent.
In H. L. Schoen & M. J. Zweng (Eds.), Estimation and mental computation (pp. 141155). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Alreck, P. L., & Settle, R. B. (1985). The survey research handbook. Homewood:
Illinios.
"An Inspector of Schools". (1914). The "practical" mental arithmetic. London:
Longmans, Green & Co.
Anderson, J. G. (1870). Mr. Anderson's general report of inspection of schools
during the year 1869. In Report of the Board of General Education, for the Year
1869 (pp. 13-14). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Anderson, J. G. (1872). Annual report of inspection. In Report of Board of General
Education, for the year 1871 (pp. 9-11). Brisbane: Government.
Anderson, J. G. (1877). General Inspector's Report. In First report of the Secretary
of Public Instruction, for the year 1876 (pp. 19-22). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Appendix B: Books supplied to schools for the instruction of pupils. (1902). The
State Education Acts, 1875 to 1900; together with the regulations of the department,
general instructions for the guidance of teachers and others, and appendices (pp.
95-96). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Arithmetic. (1927). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 33(2), pp. 14-17.
Ashcraft, M. H. (1982). The development of mental arithmetic: A chronometric
approach. Developmental Review, 2, 213-236.
Ashcraft, M. H. (1983). Procedural knowledge versus fact retrieval in mental
arithmetic: A reply to Baroody. Developmental Review, 3, 231-235.
Atweh, B. (1982). Developing mental arithmetic. In L. Silvey (Ed.), Mathematics for
the middle grades (5-9) (pp. 50-58). Reston: National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics.
377
378
379
380
381
382
Clarke, D. M. (1994). Ten key principles from research for the professional
development of mathematics teachers. In D. B. Aichele (Ed.), Professional
development for teachers of mathematics (pp. 37-48). Reston: National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics.
Class teacher's manual of oral arithmetic for Grades VII & VIII in Queensland
schools. (n. d.). Warwick: Premier Educational Publishers.
Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1990). Constructivist learning and teaching.
Arithmetic Teacher, 38(1), 34-5.
Clements, M. A. (1988). Looking to the past as a guide to the future. Vinculum,
25(4), 3-6.
Clements, M. A. (1996). The national curriculum in Australia. Educational Research
and Perspectives, 23(1). Retrieved September 13, 1997 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.ecel.uwa.edu.au/gse/erp/Vol32no1/clements.htm
Clements, M. A., Grimison, L., & Ellerton, N. (1989). Colonialism and school
mathematics in Australia 1788-1988. In N. F. Ellerton & M. A. Clements (Eds.),
School mathematics: The challenge to change (pp. 50-78). Geelong: Deakin
University Press.
Cobb, P., & Merkel, G. (1989). Thinking strategies: Teaching arithmetic through
problem solving. In P. R. Trafton & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), New directions for
elementary school mathematics (pp. 70-81). Reston: National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics.
Coburn, T. (1989). The role of computation in the changing mathematics curriculum.
In P. R. Trafton & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), New directions for elementary school
mathematics (pp. 43-56). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Cochran, D. (1955). Report as district inspector. 1954. Queensland State Archives.
EDU/A738, File No. 52837/54.
Cochran, D. (1960). Report as district inspector. 1959. Queensland State Archives.
EDU/A740, File No. 23511/60.
Cockcroft, W. H. (Chairman). (1982). Mathematics counts: Report of the committee
of inquiry into the teaching of mathematics in schools. London: HMSO.
Cohen, L., & Mannion, L. (1994). Research methods in education (2nd ed.). London:
Croom Helm.
Colburn, W. (1970). Teaching of arithmetic: An address delivered to the American
Institute of Instruction, August 1830. Reprinted in J. K. Bidwell & R. G. Clason,
(Eds.), Readings in the history of mathematics education (pp. 24-37). Washington:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Colenso, J. W. (1874). A shilling arithmetic designed for the use of elementary
schools (New Edition). London: Longmans, Green & Co.
383
384
385
386
Department of Public Instruction. (1908). The state education acts, 1875 to 1900;
together with the regulations of the Department, general instructions for the
guidance of teachers and others, and appendices. Brisbane: Acting Government
Printer.
Department of Public Instruction. (1914). The syllabus or course of instruction in
primary schools with notes for the guidance of teachers. Brisbane: The Department.
Department of Public Instruction. (1928). State education in Queensland. Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Department of Public Instruction. (1930). The syllabus or course of instruction in
primary and intermediate schools. Brisbane: The Department.
Department of Public Instruction. (1937). State education in Queensland. Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Department of Public Instruction. (1938). Amendments to course of instruction in
primary and intermediate schools. Brisbane: The Department.
Department of Public Instruction. (1946). Arithmetic for Queensland Schools.
Brisbane: Government Printer.
Department of Public Instruction. (1948a). Course of instruction in primary and
intermediate schools. Brisbane: The Department.
Department of Public Instruction. (1948b). General memorandum on 1948
amendments to the syllabus. Queensland Teachers' Journal, 53(9), 16-18.
Department of Public Instruction. (1952a). The Syllabus or course of instruction in
primary and intermediate schools, Book 1. Brisbane: Government Printer.
Department of Public Instruction. (1952b). The Syllabus or course of instruction in
primary and intermediate schools, Book 3: Mathematics. Brisbane: The Department.
387
Dewey, J. (1915). The school and society (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
District Inspectors' Reports for 1897. (1898). Queensland Education Journal, 4(6), 67.
Domas. (1952). Queensland Teachers Journal, 57(10), 10-11.
Doyle, W., & Ponder, G. (1977). The practical ethic and teacher decision-making.
Interchange, 8(3), 1-12.
Draft numeracy standardsYears 3 & 5Professional elaboration. (20 June 1997).
Canberra: Curriculum Corporation.
Drain, D. J. A. (1941). Report as district inspector. 1940. Queensland State
Archives. EDU/A737.
Dunlop, R. (1990a). Curriculum area evaluation: Mathematics education. Brisbane:
Department of Education.
Dunlop, R. (1990b). Professional development: A review of contemporary literature.
Brisbane: Department of Education.
Editorial. (1888, August 18). The Brisbane Courier, p. 6.
Editorial. (1947). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 52(10), 1-2.
Educational Reform. (1939). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 44(4), 1.
Edwards, L. D. (1922, December 30). Teachers Conference. The Queenslander. p.
13.
Edwards, L. D. (1929). Report of the Chief Inspector of Schools. In Fifty-third report
of the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1928 (pp. 30-34). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Edwards, L. D. (1931). Report of the Chief Inspector of Schools. In Fifty-fifth report
of the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1930 (pp. 27-30). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Edwards, L. D. (1933). Report of the Chief Inspector of Schools. In Fifty-seventh
report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1932 (pp. 24-28). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Edwards, L. D. (1936). Impressions gained abroad. Queensland Teachers' Journal,
41(8), 11-18.
Edwards, L. D. (1937a). Report of the Director of Education. In Sixty-first report of
the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1936 (pp. 22-25). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
388
389
390
Fox, C. L. (1905). Reports of District Inspectors. The Education Office Gazette, 7(1),
8-9.
Fox, C. L. (1908). Report of Mr. District Inspector Fox. In Thirty-second report of the
Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1907 (pp. 72-74). Brisbane: Government
Printer.
Fox, C. L. (1918). Mr. Fox's report. In Forty-second report of the Secretary of Public
Instruction, for the year 1917 (pp. 58-62). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Fox, D. J. (1969). The research process in education. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
French, D. (1987). Mental methods in mathematics. Mathematics in School, 16(2),
39-41.
Gardner, M. (1977). Mathematical carnival. New York: Random House.
Gay, L. R. (1987). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application.
(3rd Ed.). Columbus: Merrill.
George, J. (1930). From Mr. George's Report. In Fifty-fourth report of the Secretary
of Public Instruction, for the year 1929 (pp. 52-57). Brisbane: Government Printer.
George, J. (1934). From Mr. George's Report. In Fifty-eighth report of the Secretary
of Public Instruction, for the year 1933 (pp. 28-29). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Giles, E. (1986). Mental as anything. In N. F. Ellerton (Ed.), Mathematics who needs
what? (pp. 188-192). Parkville: The Mathematical Association of Victoria.
Ginsburg, H. P. (1982). The development of addition in the contexts of culture,
social class, and race. In T. P. Carpenter, J. M. Moser, & T. A. Romberg (Eds.),
Addition and subtraction: A cognitive perspective (pp. 191-210). Hillsdale: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Ginsburg, H. P., Posner, J. K., & Russell, R. L. (1981). The development of mental
addition as a function of schooling and culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 12(2), 163-178.
Girling, M. (1977). Towards a definition of basic numeracy. Mathematics Teaching,
81, 4-5.
Gladman, F. J. (n. d.). School method: Notes and hints from lectures delivered at the
Borough Road Training College, London (Revised ed.). London: Jarrold & Sons.
Gladman, F. J. (1904). School work (7th ed.). London: Jarrold & Sons.
Gladwin, H. (1985). In conclusion: Abstraction versus 'How it is'. Anthropology and
Education Quarterly, 16(3), 207-209.
391
392
393
Heirdsfield, A., & Cooper, T. J. (1995, July). Teaching implications from research on
children's mental computation for addition and subtraction. Paper presented at the
fifteenth national conference of the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers,
Darwin, Northern Territory.
Henderson, T., Irish, C. A., Bowden, L. T., & Watkin, H. G. (1935). New syllabus
mental arithmetic for Sixth Grade. Brisbane: William Brooks.
Hendren, G. R. (1939). From Mr. Hendren's Report. In Sixty-third report of the
Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1938 (pp. 53-56). Brisbane: Government
Printer.
Hendy, A. V. (1953). Report as district inspector. 1952. Queensland State Archives.
EDU/A738, File No. 66544/53.
Henry, G. T. (1990). Practical sampling. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
Hickling, R. W. (1983, April). Problem-solving in Queensland primary schools. Paper
presented at Brisbane North Region Principals Meeting, Brisbane.
Hiebert, J. (1989). Reflections after the conference on number sense. In J. T.
Sowder & B. P. Schappelle (Eds.), Establishing foundations for research on number
sense and related topics: Report of a conference (pp. 82-84). San Diego: San Diego
State University for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.
Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in
mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and
procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Hill, S. (1983). An agenda for action: Status and impact. In G. Shufelt (Ed.), The
agenda in action (pp. 1-7). Reston: National Council of Mathematics Teachers.
Hitch, G. J. (1977). Mental arithmetic: Short-term storage and information
processing in a cognitive skill. In A. M. Lesgold, J. W. Pellegrino, S. Fokkema, & R.
Glaser (Eds.), Cognitive psychology and instruction (pp. 331-338). New York:
Plenum Press.
Hitch, G. J. (1978). The role of short-term memory in mental arithmetic. Cognitive
Psychology, 10, 302-323.
Hope, J. A. (1985). Unravelling the mysteries of expert mental calculation.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16(4), 355-374.
Hope, J. A. (1986a). Mental calculation: Anachronism or basic skill? In H. L. Schoen
& M. J. Zweng (Eds.), Estimation and mental computation (pp. 45-54). Reston:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
394
395
396
397
398
399
Macgroarty, D. C. (1902). Report of Mr. District Inspector Macgroarty. In Twentysixth report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1901 (pp. 66-67).
Brisbane: Government Printer.
Maier, E. (1980). Folk mathematics. Mathematics Teaching, 93, 21-23.
Markovits, Z. (1989). Reactions to the number sense conference. In J. T. Sowder &
B. P. Schappelle (Eds.). Establishing foundations for research on number sense and
related topics: Report of a conference (pp. 78-81). San Diego: San Diego State
University for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.
Markovits, Z., & Sowder, J. (1994). Developing number sense: An intervention study
in Grade 7. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(1), 4-29.
Martin, F. J. (1916). Mr. Martin's Report. In Fortieth report of the Secretary of Public
Instruction, for the year 1915 (pp. 133-136). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Martin, G. (1920a). Talks to young teachers - Arithmetic. Queensland Education
Journal, 25(12), 81-82.
Martin, G. (1920b). Talks to young teachers - Arithmetic. Queensland Education
Journal, 25(13), 98-100.
Masingila, J. O., Davidenko, S., Prus-Wisniowska, E., & Agwu, N. (1994, April).
Mathematics learning and practice in and out of schools: A framework for making
these experiences complementary. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Indianapolis. (Educational Resources
Information Centre Document, Microfiche Edition, ED 373 960).
Mathematical Sciences Education Board and National Research Council. (1990).
Reshaping school mathematics: A philosophy and framework for curriculum.
Washington: National Academy Press.
Mathematics Subcommittee of Syllabus Committee. (1947). Discussion paper:
Changes to Grade VI mathematics. Queensland State Archives. A/18581.
McCormack, J. (1947, 8 August). Letter to Mr. District Inspector Radford containing
comments concerning syllabus [Attached to letter to D. I. Radford from Granville
State School]. Queensland State Archives. A/18581.
McIntosh, A. J. (1978). Some subtractions: What do you think you are doing?
Mathematics Teaching, 83, 17-18.
McIntosh, A. (1988). Mental arithmetic. In C. Lovitt & D. M. Clarke (Eds.). The
mathematics curriculum and teaching program activity book (Vol. 1) (pp. 239-297).
Canberra: Curriculum Development Centre.
400
401
402
Mutch, A. (1916). Mr. Mutch's report. In Fortieth report of the Secretary of Public
Instruction, for the year 1915 (pp. 59-63). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Mutch, A. (1924). From Mr. Mutch's report. In Forty-eighth report of the Secretary of
Public Instruction, for the year 1923 (pp. 38-41). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Mutch, A. (1925). From Mr. Mutch's report. In Forty-ninth report of the Secretary of
Public Instruction, for the year 1924 (pp. 46-49). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Myers, J. L., & Well, A. D. (1995). Research design and statistical analysis.
Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics. (1977). Position paper on basic
skills. Arithmetic Teacher, 25(1), 19-22.
National Council of Supervisors of Mathematics. (1989). Essential mathematics for
the twenty-first century: The position of the National Council of Supervisors of
Mathematics. Arithmetic Teacher, 37(1), 44-46.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1980). An agenda for action:
Recommendations for school mathematics of the 1980s. Reston: The Council.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation
standards for school mathematics. Reston: The Council.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for
teaching mathematics. Reston: The Council.
National Curriculum: Mathematics Working Group. (1988). National curriculum:
Mathematics for ages 5 to 16. London: Department of Education and Science and
the Welsh Office.
National Numeracy Project. (April 1997). Draft framework for numeracy: Years 1 to
6. London: Department of Education and Science and the Welsh Office.
National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts: A report to the nation on the
future of mathematics education. Washington: National Academy Press.
Nesher, P. (1986). Are mathematical understanding and algorithmic performance
related? For the Learning of Mathematics, 6, 2-9.
New syllabus. (1929). The Education Office Gazette, 31(10), 460-465.
New syllabus mental arithmetic for third grade. (1932). Brisbane: William Brooks.
Norusis, M. N. (1991). SPSS/PC+ Studentware plus [Computer program manual].
Chicago: SPSS Inc.
403
Nunes, T., Schliemann, A. D., & Carraher, D. W. (1993). Street mathematics and
school mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Office of the Minister for Education. (1996). Media statement: Quinn cans Student
Performance Standards. Brisbane: The State of Queensland.
Ohio Department of Education. (n. d.). Model competency-based mathematics
program. Cleveland: The Department.
Olander, H. T., & Brown, B. I. (1959). Journal of Educational Research, 53(3), 97102.
Olsen, F. J. (1953). Oral arithmetic: Grade VIII. Brisbane: A. McLeod.
"Omega". (1871, January 14). Short papers on popular education, No. 1. The
Queenslander, p. 8.
Oostenbroek, P. (1976). Basic Maths Facts. Brisbane: Jacaranda.
Our first half-century: A review of Queensland progress. (1909). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Owen, E., & Sweller, J. (1989). Should problem solving be used as a learning device
in mathematics? Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 322-328.
Palfrey A. E. (1928). From Mr. Palfrey's Report. In Fifty-second report of the
Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1927 (pp. 102-108). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Papi, F. (1912). Report of Mr. Acting District Inspector Papi. In Thirty-sixth report of
the Secretary of Public Instruction, for the year 1911 (pp. 49-52). Brisbane:
Government Printer.
Para 143: The course of instruction for each class. (1891). In State Education Act of
1875; together with the regulations of the Department, general instructions for the
guidance of teachers and others (pp. 23-24). Brisbane: Government Printer.
Para 144: Standards of proficiency. (1891). In State Education Act of 1875; together
with the regulations of the Department , general instructions for the guidance of
teachers and others (pp. 24-28). Brisbane: Government Printer
Park, A. (1879). Manual of method for pupil-teachers and assistant masters.
London: Blackie & Son.
Parliamentary Select Committee on Education in Queensland (M. Ahern, Chair).
(1980). Final report: Section 2 - A brief history of education in Queensland and the
background to the present inquiry. Brisbane: Government Printer.
404
405
406
407
408
409
Sachar, J. (1978). An instrument for evaluating mental arithmetic skills. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 9, 233-237.
Salmon, B., & Grace, N. (1984). Problem solving: Some issues concerning the
teaching and learning of skills and strategies during Years 1-10. Brisbane:
Curriculum Services Branch, Department of Education.
Sauble, I. (1955). Development of ability to estimate and to compute mentally.
Arithmetic Teacher, 2, 33-39.
Schall, W. (1973). Comparing mental arithmetic modes of presentation in
elementary school mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 73, 359-366.
Schedule V: Table of the minimum amount of attainments required from pupils for
admission into each class in primary schools. (1876). Queensland Government
Gazette, XVII(36), 825.
Schedule V: Standards of the classification of pupils; or, table of the minimum
amount of attainments required for admission into each class in primary schools.
(1885). Queensland Government Gazette, XXXVI(30), 490-491.
Schedule V: Course of instruction for each class. (1894). Queensland Government
Gazette, LXII(34), 320-321.
Schedule V: Course of instruction for each class. (1897). Queensland Government
Gazette, LXVII(62), 798-799.
Schedule VI: Standards of proficiency. (1894). Queensland Government Gazette,
LXII(34), 321-323.
Schedule VI: Standards of proficiency. (1897). Queensland Government Gazette,
LXVII(62), 799-801
Schedule XIV: Course of instruction for each class. (1902). Queensland
Government Gazette, LXXIX(18), 169-170.
Schedule XIV: Preface & Course of instruction for each class. (1904). Education
Office Gazette, VI(11), 200-211.
Schedule XV: Standards of proficiency. (1902). Queensland Government Gazette,
LXXIX(18), 170-174.
Schildt, A. M., Reithmuller, S. E., & Searle, C. L. (n. d.) Towards our emerging
philosophy of education in Australia. Queensland State Archives: A/18580.
Miscellaneous correspondence, notes and papers of Syllabus Committee.
Schoen, H. L., Blume, G., & Hart, E. W. (1987, April). Measuring computational
estimation processes. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American
410
411
412
413
Teaching hints: Arithmetic. (1908). The Education Office Gazette, 10(1), 15-18.
Teaching of arithmetic. (1927). The Education Office Gazette, 29(8), 292.
"The...Commentator". (1947). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 52(4), 21.
The "dead hand" of inspection. (1939). Queensland Teachers Journal, 44(10), 1.
The new syllabus. (1904). Queensland Education Journal, 10(8), 142-143.
The primary school syllabus. (1933). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 38(7), 1.
The Queensland State Department of Education: 1875-1904. (1966). Queensland
Teacher's Journal, 71(10), 324-331.
The real issue in the 1948 scholarship papers. (1949). Queensland Teachers'
Journal, 54(3), 1-2.
The syllabus. (1934). Queensland Teachers' Journal, 39(8), 1.
The teacher's revised syllabus. (1927). Queensland Teacher's Journal, 32(10), 1119.
Thistlethwaite, J. K. (1954). Report as district inspector. 1953. Queensland State
Archives. EDU/A738, File. No. 52837/54.
Thompson, A. G., Philipp, R. A., Thompson, P. W., & Boyd, B. A. (1994).
Calculational and conceptual orientations in teaching mathematics. In D. B. Aichele
(Ed.). Professional development for teachers of mathematics (pp. 79-92). Reston:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Thompson, F. C. (1930). The Queensland arithmetic. Grade V. Brisbane: Aitken.
Thorndike, E. (1922). The psychology of arithmetic. New York: Macmillan.
Thornton, C. (1985). Mental. Rhombus, 13(4), 9-12.
Thornton, C. A., Jones, G. A., & Neal, J. L. (1995). The 100s chart: A stepping stone
to mental mathematics. Teaching Children Mathematics, 1(8), 480-483.
Trafton, P. R. (1978). Estimation and mental arithmetic: Important components of
computation. In M. Suydam & R. E. Reys (Eds.), Developing computational skills
(pp. 196-213). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Trafton, P. R. (1986). Teaching computational estimation: Establishing an estimation
mind-set. In H. L. Schoen (Ed.), Estimation and mental computation (pp. 16-30).
Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
414
415
416
419
APPENDIX A
1860 Schedule
A.2
1876 Schedule
Minimum attainments2 required from pupils for admission into each class.
(Specific details were not provided for the First class in 1876. The following were
issued by Under Secretary Anderson in April 1879):
Mensuration of surfaces.
2 The minimum attainments for admission into any class are the maximum attainments
expected from the class below it. The schedule can therefore be regarded as a
Programme of Instruction for pupils attending Primary Schools. The work to be gone
through in any class (the Fifth Class excepted) will be found detailed in the column with
the name of the class next above it. (Regulations of the Department of Public instruction
in Queensland. (1985). Queensland Government Gazette, XXXVI(30), p. 490).
420
A.3
421
422
Third half-year:
Mental - exercises in vulgar fractions, decimals and proportion.
Fifth class (Course 1 years):
To perform mentally operations in the following rules: Interest; discount; square
root; percentages. Revision of the course for first, second, and third classes.
Standards of proficiency:
First half-year:
Mental - easy exercises in interest, discount, and square root;
Second half-year:
Mental - easy exercises in percentages.
Third half-year:
Mental - easy exercises in the preceding rules.
Sixth class (Course 2 years):
Revision of the course for fourth and fifth classes, with mental exercises.
A.4
1894 Schedule
Minor changes in standards of proficiency from 1892 resulting from the First and
Sixth Class being reduced from 2 years to 1 years.
First class (Course 1 years)
Standards of proficiency:
First half-year:
To add mentally numbers applied to objects to a result not greater than 20.
Second half-year:
To add mentally numbers applied to objects to a result not greater than 30,
and to separate numbers not greater than 30 into two component parts.
Third half-year:
To add mentally numbers to a result not greater than 40, and to lessen
mentally any number of two figures by any number on one figure.
423
A.5
1897 Schedule
Third half-year:
Easy problems in money, mentally.
424
For the fifth and sixth classes, the mental arithmetic to be taught is not directly
specified. Following the specification of other work, which is presented here in
brackets, the schedule simply states "mental arithmetic".
425
Standards of proficiency:
First half-year:
Mental arithmetic. (Profit and loss; miscellaneous problems, with special
reference to vulgar fractions;, cube root; mensuration of the polygon, prism,
and cylinder)
Second half-year:
Mental arithmetic. (Stocks; miscellaneous problems, with special reference to
decimal fractions; mensuration of the cone and pyramid)
Third half-year:
Mental arithmetic. (Misc. problems; mensuration of planes and solids)
A.6
For the fifth and sixth classes, the mental arithmetic to be taught is not directly
specified. Following the specification of other work, which is presented here in
brackets, the schedules simply states "mental arithmetic".
426
Second half-year:
Mental arithmetic (Commercial arithmetic; stocks; mensuration - Longman's,
Chapters I to X)
Third half-year:
Mental arithmetic (Commercial arithmetic; mensuration - Longman's,
Chapters I to XI)
A.7
427
Mathematics - Oral and Mental Work. As before, with the addition of easy
transactions in stocks. Easy operations in algebra and geometry, at the discretion
of the teacher.
A.8
428
A.9
1930 Syllabus
429
430
Notes:
The exercises outlined in the previous grade could be continued and
extended to harder examples in their application. These exercises are
intended only as an introduction to the study of vulgar fractions at a later
stage.
Resolving easy numbers such as 24 and 36 to prime factors as
preparation for the work in fractions and cancelling.
(b) Simple mental problems based on the tables.
Notes:
These exercises are intended to show the practical application of the
tables, and to serve as an introduction to the compound rules.
(c) Buying and selling, saving and spending, with sums to 1. Simple exercises
based on the four rules in money.
Notes:
The material for these exercises will be supplied by ordinary household
accounts, as for example, the butcher's, the baker's, the grocer's, or the
draper's bills.
Grade IV: Oral Arithmetic.
(a) Exercises involving the use of vulgar fractions (denominators not to exceed
12) and of decimals to tenths.
Notes:
Fractional parts will now include fractions such as 3/8, 5/6, 11,12, 4/9, 6/7,
3/5 applied to numbers, money, and to tables - e.g. 3/8 of 1; 7/10 of 1;
3/7 of 1 quarter (in lb);
Decimals - .7 of 1; .9 of 1 ton, etc.
(b) Mental exercises based on the compound rules, including household and
shopping transactions familiar to the pupils.
Notes:
Shopping transactions continued, and in addition, exercises as
preparation for the written work in weights and measures.
Grade V: Oral Arithmetic.
(a) Exercises involving the use of vulgar and decimal fractions
Notes:
Simple exercises involving the four rules as introduction to the written
work, e.g. + 1/3; 3/8 + 1/4; of 8/9; .2 + .3 + .4; .8 2; 2 .5.
The conversion of easy vulgar fractions to decimals and vice versa:
= .5; = .25; 7/8 = .875; 3/5 = .6, etc.
431
Notes:
Preparatory exercises as introduction to Simple Proportion, e.g. 1 florin to
1 = 1/10 or .1; 1 furlong to 1 mile = 1/8 or .125; 1 rood to 1 acre = or
.25; 1 ton 10 cwts. to 2 tons 10 cwts = 3/5 or .6. etc. (See Practical School
Method, Cox & MacDonald, 269-171)
(c) Aliquot parts of 1 represented by either fractions or decimals
Notes:
Variety of mental exercises involving use of simple aliquot parts is
essential.
(d) Mental exercises dealing with money, wights and measures, vulgar and
decimal fractions (applied to concrete quantities), simple proportion. Finding
areas of squares and rectangles.
Notes:
Preliminary work in mensuration should be confined entirely to oral and
mental exercises.
(e) Practice in working by short methods (e.g. "dozens" and "scores" rules might
be applied).
Notes:
After the pupils have been thoroughly exercises in any rule, short
methods of calculation could be introduced. To encourage initiative,
different solutions of the same problem might be required from the pupils.
The 'dozens' and 'scores' rules might be applied.
Grade VI (1st Form, Intermediate Schools): Oral Work.
(a) Exercises preparatory to the written work, including operations in simple
business transactions of a wider range than those taken in Grade V.
Notes:
The work in this Grade will extend that of Grade V., and will include
exercises in simple proportion, percentages, and simple interest; squaring
and taking the square root; exercises preliminary to written work in
Mensuration. While written work in Practice is not required, simple
exercises, formerly regarded as questions in this rule, should be given
and worked by appropriate methods. These will include problems in use
of aliquot parts in such examples as - 18 books at 2s 6d each; 40 sheep
at 1 12s. 6d. each.
Grade VII (2nd Form, Intermediate Schools): Oral Work.
(a) Mental exercises preparatory to the written work in arithmetic and
mensuration.
(b) Practice in short methods of calculation.
Notes:
432
Pupils should be given practice in devising short cuts and easy methods.
433
434
435
436
Notes:
Variety of mental exercises involving the use of simple aliquot parts is
essential.
(d) Exercises dealing with money, weights, and measures, and vulgar and
decimal fractions (applied to concrete quantities)
(e) Practice in working by short methods.
Notes:
After the pupils have been thoroughly exercises in any rule, short
methods of calculation could be introduced. To encourage initiative,
different solutions of the same problem might bed required from the
pupils. The 'dozens' and 'scores' rules might be applied.
Grade VI: Oral Work.
(a) Exercises preparatory to written work
(b) Exercises of practical value in teaching principles involved in written
arithmetic and those used in every day commercial transactions
(c) Short methods of calculation.
Notes:
The dozen rule; The score rule; The value of 240 articles; The value of
480 articles; Aliquot parts of one pound; The square of numbers with ;
also square of numbers ending in 5; Division and multiplication by 25.
Grade VII: Oral Work.
(a) Mental exercises preparatory to the written work in Arithmetic and
Mensuration
(b) Continued practice in short methods of calculation
437
438
Notes:
Give abundant practice in such exercises as: 26+17; 43-17; 34+19; 41-16
(b) Fractions: Application of fractions (,1/3,, &c. to 1/12) to numbers, money,
and quantities (multiplies of denominators only)
Notes:
The exercises are intended only as introduction to the study of vulgar
fractions at a later stage. 1/6 of 72; 1/9 of 54; 1/5 of 1 = ?s.; 1/7 of 1s.
2d. = ?d.; lb = ?ozs.; of a gallon = ? pts.
(c) Money: Exercises based on reduction, addition, and subtraction.
Notes:
Reduction - one step - to s.; s. to ; s. to d.; d. to s.; d. to d.; d. to d.;
s. to 6d. or 3d. and vice versa.
Addition: Any two amounts in pence and halfpence not to exceed 1s., e.g.
3d. and 5d. Any three amounts in pence only, not to exceed 2s, e.g.,
2d. + 8d. + 9d. (Answer in s.d.). Any two amounts each composed of an
exact number of shillings, the sum not to exceed 2, e.g. 18s. + 19s.; 27s.
+ 9s. (Answer in and s.)
Subtraction: Exercises based on giving change from sums of money not
exceeding 3s.
(d) Problems involving not more than two operations.
Grade V: Oral Arithmetic.
(a) Exercises based on the four simple rules.
(b) Money: Reduction and four rules.
Notes:
Reduction: One operation with amounts to 1, e.g. 16s.4d. to pence. Two
operations: shillings, pence, and halfpence to halfpence and viced versa;
limit of 4s., e.g. 3s.9d. to halfpence
Addition: Add three amounts expressed in pence and halfpence e.g. 9d.
+ 10d. + 8d. Add two amounts expressed in shillings and pence, e.g.
3s. 6d. + 5s. 6d.; 2s 11d + 8d.
Subtraction: Practical problems in giving change, e.g. Docket, 2s.7d.;
coins offered 2 florins; what change?
Multiplication: Limited to one reduction, e.g. 9d. x 12; 2s. 9d. x 6;
1 7s. x 5.
Division: Sum to be divided not to exceed 2, and not exceed one step in
reduction: 3s.4d. 8; 15s.7d. 5 (No remainders)
(c) Practical applications of tables of weights and measures
Notes: Exercises introductory to written work.
(d) Exercises in finding perimeters of rectangular figures.
439
Notes:
Exercises to be regarded as practical applications of Long measure table.
Dimensions of one denomination only; answer may be expressed in two
denominations.
(e) Fractions: Application of fractions (,1/3,, &c. to 1/12) to numbers, money,
and quantities
Notes:
Exercises are intended as introduction to the study of fractions at a later
stage.
Grade VI: Oral Arithmetic
(a) Exercises preparatory to written work
Notes:
In the initial stages use blackboard freely in setting examples
(b) Exercises involving the use of vulgar fractions. Denominators not to exceed
12.
Notes:
Easy exercises on fractional equivalents up to 12ths. e.g. 3/4 = 1/8;
4/6 = 2/?; 4 = 4 ?/10
Exercises in reduction to lowest terms.
Reduction of improper fractions to mixed numbers and vice versa.
Reduce one number or amount to the fraction of another, e.g. What
fraction is 6 of 8? Reduce 1s.3d. to the fraction of 2s. What fraction of 1
mile is 20 chains?
Addition and subtraction of two fractions - LCD not to exceed 12.
Multiply a proper fraction or a mixed number by whole number to 12.
Multiply two fractions.
Divide proper fractions by a whole number.
Divide whole number by a fraction.
Divide a proper fraction by a proper fraction.
(c) Exercises involving the use of finite decimal fractions.
Notes:
Conversion of vulgar fractions to decimals and vice versa: involving
halves, quarters, fifths, eights, and tenths, e.g. = .5; = .25
Addition and subtraction: Limited to two decimal places, e.g. .2+.3; .8+.5;
.08+.2; .9-.2; 3-.6; 2-.05
Multiplication: Product not to exceed two decimal places, e.g. 7 x .5; .3x.2;
8x1.2
Division: Quotient not to exceed two decimal places, e.g. 34; 68; .25.
Easy decimalization of money and quantities, e.g. 6 8s. = 6.4; 3 tons 16
cwt = 3.8 tons
440
(d) Aliquot parts of 1 and 1s. - both vulgar and decimal fractions.
Notes:
Denominators of vulgar fractions not to exceed 12.
(e) Practical exercises dealing with money, weights and measures, vulgar and
decimal fractions
(f)
Ratio.
441
Notes:
Give much oral practice in expressing ratios as vulgar fractions and vice
versa.
(g) Simple proportion.
(h) Percentages and their application to Profit and Loss and Simple Interest.
Notes: (See written work):
Express percentages as vulgar and decimal fractions.
Express fractions and percentages.
Express money as percentage of a , and vice versa.
Find percentages of numbers and quantities.
With percentages given, find full values of numbers and quantities.
Find what percentage one number or quantity is of another.
Increase or decrease a number or quantity by a given percentage
Find what percentage numbers or quantities are increased/decreased.
(i)
Mensuration
Notes:
Exercises preparatory to written work.
Area and perimeter of square and rectangle.
Areas and cost of paths and borders.
Areas of walls and costs of painting.
No reverse processes.
442
443
Notes:
These exercises teach processes that arise in actual multiplication and
division sums: 7 x 3 + 2, 23 3; 12 x 4 + 3, 51 4.
(d) Practical activities:
Reading the clock (In divisions of five minutes);
Measuring length (In feet and inches).
Notes:
The necessity for practice for each member of class is stressed.
(e) Exercises on the four simple rules with numbers within the pupils' range.
Notes:
Exercises should be a preparation for written work.
(f)
Shopping exercises involving use of component parts of 3d., 6d., and 1s. (to
meet shopping needs within the pupils' experience)
Notes:
Highest amount from which change will be required is one shilling.
Terms:
Pair, couple, dozen, score, half, double, plus, minus, equals.
Pound, pint, minute, hour, day, week.
444
Notes:
Types such as 28+7; 49+6; 35-28; 55-49 need special attention.
(b) Combined multiplication and addition. Division with remainder.
Notes:
These applied tables teach processes that arise in multiplication and
division sums: 8 x 7 + 3, 59 7; 5 x 9 + 6, 51 9.
(c) Easy factors and multiples.
(d) Exercises on the four simple rules on tables taught (limited to two steps)
Notes:
Give practice in such exercises as: 26+17; 34+19; 43-17; 61-16.
(e) Fractions: Application of fractions (, 1/3, , &c. to 1/12) to numbers, money
and quantities (multiples of denominators only).
Notes:
The exercises are intended only as an introduction to the study of vulgar
fractions at a later stage: 1/6 of 72; 1/9 of 54; 1/5 of 1 = ?s.; 1/7 of 1s.2s.
= ?d.; lb. = ?ozs; of a gallon = ?pts.
(f)
445
446
(j)
447
(j)
(k) Practical exercises dealing with money, weights and measures, vulgar and
decimal fractions.
(i)
448
(g) Squares and square roots. (See note for Grade VI.)
(h) Vulgar fractions: Addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.
Notes:
Limited to two termsdenominators not to exceed 12.
(i)
(j)
449
Ratio.
Notes:
Give much oral practice in expressing ratios as vulgar fractions and vice
versa.
450
APPENDIX B
451
8. Mrs Beatrice Ensor, founder of the New Education Fellowship, visited Australia
in 1937 to attend conferences of the Fellowship, the first of which was held in
Brisbane.
9. Cramer (Superintendent of Schools, The Dalles, Oregon) toured Australian
schools in 1934 and published his observations in an Australian Council of
Educational Research publication, Australian Schools Through American Eyes
(1936).
10. This belief is reiterated in the General Introduction to the 1930 Syllabus:
Teachers will be expected to adapt the curriculum to levels of growth and to
individual differences, and to organise activities that, while realising the
purposes of the curriculum, will suit local circumstances...Where teachers
probe below the letter to catch the spirit of the Syllabus, we can expect the
most permanent results. (Department of Public Instruction, 1930, p. xi)
11. A copy of Burt's Mental Tests in Arithmetic was not found during the research
for this study.
12. The Committee of Seven, under the Direction of Carleton Washburne
(Superintendent of Schools, Winnetka, Illinois), set out to determine the stage of
mental development at which specific mathematics topics could be most
effectively mastered. Its report was published in the 29th Year Book of the
National Society for the Study of Education (1932).
13. Prior to the 1952 syllabus, times for each subject were not specified. Arithmetic
was considered by many to be "a subject that [would] poach time from every
other subject in the syllabus" (Darling Downs Branch, 1946, p. 21), particularly
in the scholarship class. Cunningham and Price (1934, p. 61) found that
Queensland teachers of Grades II to VII devoted an average of approximately 5
hr per week on Arithmetic, compared to 4hr 23min in South Australian schools,
for example. By 1949 the average time spent in Queensland was 5hr per
week (ACER, 1949, p. 12).
14. In the General Introduction to the 1930 Syllabus it was stated that:
It is generally agreed that the Primary School - the only kind of school some
children will know - should teach its pupils to speak, to read, and to write;
introduce them to what men think and do, and to what men have thought
and done; enable them to gain some general ideas of the natural world;
give them practice in the art of calculation; train them in habits of
observation; develop their manual dexterity; introduce them to the beauty of
form, colour, and sound; and improve their physique - in short, it should
develop a sound mind in a sound body. (Department of Public Instruction,
1930, p. v; 1952a, p.1)
15. Five hours per week for mathematics was suggested as an appropriate time
allocation for Grades III to VII in the General Memorandum issued to schools
452
453
(b) a score of articles. Calculate the given cost of one article in shillings, and
7 = 22. 11s. 8d.
call the shillings pounds: 1 score @ 1. 2s. 7d. = 22 12
(c)
22. (a) Compound rules involved the addition, subtraction, multiplication or division
of compound quantities; that is, of quantities that are expressed in terms of
different denominations: e.g. 2s. 6d. x 4. (Pendlebury & Beard, 1922, p. 29)
(b) Reduction was the process of converting a quantity from one denomination
to another: e.g. inches to feet or vice versa. (Pendlebury & Beard, 1922, p.
27)
(c) "Practice [was] a method of calculating by the addition of aliquot parts' the
value of a simple or compound quantity, when the value of a unit of one
denomination [was] given. The method [was] simple' or compound',
according as the quantity considered [was] simple or compound".
(Pendlebury & Beard, 1922, p. 105)
For example: (i) to calculate the cost of 18 articles at 10s. each, using
simple practice, knowing that 10s. is one-half of one pound, the cost of the
18 articles would be of 18, which is 9; (ii) to calculate the cost of 60
yards of material at 5d. per yard, find the cost if it was 1d. per yard (5s.) and
multiply this result by 5 (0 5s. 0d. x 5 = 1 5s. 0d.).
23. The unitary method for manipulating proportions involved finding the cost of one
unit from given information from which the value of the required number of units
could be calculated. For example, to calculate the cost of 7 yards of material,
knowing that 5 yards cost 15s: The cost of 1 yard is 3s. Therefore, the cost of 7
yards is 21s. or 1 1s.
24. While this advice was directed at the situation in England, it may have been
relevant to Queensland, given that the Report of the Secretary of Public
Instruction for 1898 indicated that the number of Sixth Class children in
Queensland was 1,668 (Dalrymple, 1899, p. 5).
25. The changes to the written work contained in the 1930 Syllabus, for children of
comparable ages given the changes in class structure, included:
Grade I: "Simple introductory exercises in division" rather than working with
divisors to 6.
Grade II: Divisors limited to one-digit numbers rather than to 100.
Grade III: Four rules and reduction of money with sums limited to 20 rather than
100.
Grade VI: Complex fractions, previously studied during the second term of Fifth
Class were removed from syllabus.
("New Syllabus, 1929, pp. 460-462)
454
455
(13 x 8) - (14 x 7)
12 x AB = 204. Find the missing figures A and B.
(32 - 17 + 15) 15
The dividend is 288 and the divisor is 12. What is the quotient?
A man had four bags. The first held 19 pennies and each of the others 15
pennies. How many pennies were there in the four bags?
(New Syllabus Mental Arithmetic for Third Grade, 1932, p. 5)
456
APPENDIX C
Self-Completion Questionnaire
COVER PAGE
Focus:
Purpose:
Instructions: Please do not put your name or that of your school on the questionnaire as
there is no valid use for this information in the analysis and reporting of the
data supplied.
Sections 1, 2 and 3 of the survey contain statements about Mental
Computation to which you are asked to respond. Section 4 obtains data about
you, your school, and inservice with respect to Mental Computation.
Section 1 is for all respondents. Please circle a number to show the extent to
which you Agree or Disagree with each of the statements.
Section 2 is for those currently responsible for a particular class. Please circle
a number to show the frequency over a week that you use each of the
teaching techniques. Space is also provided for you to list resources that you
have found useful.
Section 3 is for those who had the responsibility of a class at anytime in the
period 1964 - 1987. Please circle a number to show how important you
considered mental computation to be, and how frequently each of the listed
teaching techniques was used. Space is also provided for you to list
resources that you have found useful during this period.
Section 4 is for all respondents. Please tick the boxes that are appropriate for
you and your school.
On completion, please return this questionnaire to the contact person in your
school. This will enable all questionnaires from your school to be returned in
the stamped, addressed packet which has been sent to your school's contact
person.
Thanking you
Geoff Morgan
Lawnton State School
457
SECTION 1
BELIEFS ABOUT MENTAL COMPUTATION AND HOW IT SHOULD BE TAUGHT
Circle a number on each line to show the extent to which you Agree or Disagree with
each statement. Please remember that this part of the survey is interested in the
mental calculation of exact answers beyond the basic facts.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
458
SECTION 1 (BELIEFS) cont.
Strongly
Disagree
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
459
SECTION 2
CURRENT TEACHING PRACTICES
Never
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
460
SECTION 2 (CURRENT PRACTICES) cont.
Never
36.
37.
38.
SECTION 2.2
Resources:
Please list any resources (e.g. texts) currently used for developing the ability to
calculate exact answers mentally.
Comments:
Please write any comments you may care to make:
461
SECTION 3
PAST TEACHING PRACTICES
If you were not a class teacher at any time during the period 1964 - 1987, please go to
Section 4 on Page 8.
SECTION 3.1
If you taught during a particular period, please circle a number to show the level of importance placed on mental
computation during each period. If you are unsure, please place a tick on the line provided.
No
Little
Some
Great
Importance Importance Importance Importance Unsure
39.
40.
___
___
___
___
___
___
SECTION 3.2
If you taught during a particular period, please circle a number on each line to show how frequently you used each
teaching technique to develop the ability to mentally calculate exact answers beyond the basic facts. If you are
unsure, please place a tick on the line provided.
Never
41.
Seldom
Sometimes Often
Unsure
___
___
___
462
SECTION 3 (PAST PRACTICES) cont.
Never
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Unsure
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
___
463
SECTION 3 (PAST PRACTICES) cont.
SECTION 3.3
Resources:
Please list any resources (e.g. texts) that were used to develop the ability to
calculate exact answers mentally. If any were used for a limited period only,
please indicate.
Comments:
Please write below any comments you may care to make:
464
SECTION 4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
South West
North West
Metropolitan West
Wide Bay
Peninsula
Capricornia
Northern
South Coast
49.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1-5 yrs
Principal
Teaching Principal?
Deputy Principal?
51. If a class teacher, which year level/s are you currently teaching?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 None
52. Is your school a trial school for Student Performance Standards in
mathematics?
Yes
No
465
SECTION 4 (BACKGROUND INFORMATION) cont.
53. If your school is a trial school and you are currently a class teacher,
are you trialing the standards in your classroom?
Yes
No
No
55. Have you attended, during the last three years, inservice sessions in which
Mental Computation was a specific topic for discussion?
Yes
No
56. If you have attended inservice on Mental Computation, who conducted the
inservice?
Teaching colleague
Tertiary Lecturer
Administrator
Mathematics Adviser
Other
Comments:
Please write any further comments you may care to make:
THANK YOU for completing this survey. Please return it, in the envelope provided, to the
contact person in your school.
466
APPENDIX D
SURVEY CORRESPONDENCE
D.1
Dear Colleague
As detailed in the attached "Memorandum to Principals" from the Executive
Director, Review and Evaluation, approval has been granted for me (Geoff
Morgan, Deputy Principal, Lawnton State School) to approach you to invite
your participation in a survey of beliefs and teaching practices related to
Mental Computation (Mental Arithmetic). Your school has been randomly
selected as part of a sample of 115 State Primary Schools from all Education
Regions and bands of schools.
The attached Research Outline indicates that the survey is designed as a
culmination to historical research currently being undertaken. The aim of the
project is to document the nature and place of Mental Computation in
Queensland primary classrooms from 1860 to the present. The research is
part of a doctoral program supervised by Dr Calvin Irons of the Queensland
University of Technology's School of Mathematics, Science and Technology.
Rather than simply send a copy of the questionnaire to you in this mailing,
the purpose of this letter is to determine whether you would be prepared to
participate in the survey. The questionnaire should take about 15-20 minutes
to complete, with not all respondents having to complete all sections. The
information to be gathered concerns: Current beliefs about Mental
Computation and how it should be taught; Present teaching practices; and
Past teaching practices related to the 1964 Syllabus, and to the 1966-68 and
1975 "Programs in Mathematics". I am also interested in identifying the
resources used by teachers to support the development of Mental
Computation skills.
While some personal background information is asked for, all information
obtained will be treated confidentially. In fact, you are asked not to identify
yourself or your school on the questionnaire itself as this information does not
have any valid use during data analysis. Some questions relate to recent
inservice opportunities with regard to Mental Computation. Besides being
able to document the status of Mental Computation, it is also hoped to be
able to provide recommendations to the Department on any inservice needs
which may be identified.
/2
467
Please complete the appropriate section below and return in the envelope
provided (by Monday, 18 October) to:
Geoff Morgan
Lawnton State School
P.O. Box 2
LAWNTON 4501
Phone:
Fax:
OR
468
D.2
Dear Colleague
As detailed in the attached "Memorandum to Principals" from the Executive
Director, Review and Evaluation, approval has been granted for me (Geoff
Morgan, Deputy Principal, Lawnton State School) to approach you to invite
your participation, and that of your staff, in a survey of beliefs and teaching
practices related to Mental Computation (Mental Arithmetic). Your school has
been randomly selected as part of a sample of 115 State Primary Schools
from all Education Regions and bands of schools.
The attached Research Outline indicates that the survey is designed as a
culmination to historical research currently being undertaken. The aim of the
project is to document the nature and place of Mental Computation in
Queensland primary classrooms from 1860 to the present. The research is
part of a doctoral program supervised by Dr Calvin Irons of the Queensland
University of Technology's School of Mathematics, Science and Technology.
Rather than simply send copies of the questionnaire to you in this mailing,
the purpose of this letter is to determine whether you and/or members of your
staff would be prepared to participate in the survey. The questionnaire should
take about 15-20 minutes to complete, with not all respondents having to
complete all sections. The information to be gathered concerns: Current
beliefs about Mental Computation and how it should be taught; Present
teaching practices; and Past teaching practices related to the 1964 Syllabus,
and to the 1966-68 and 1975 "Programs in Mathematics". I am also
interested in identifying the resources used by teachers to support the
development of Mental Computation skills.
While some personal background information is asked for, all information
obtained will be treated confidentially. In fact, respondents are asked not to
identify themselves or their school on the questionnaire as this information
does not have any valid use during data analysis. Some questions relate to
recent inservice opportunities with regard to Mental Computation. Besides
being able to document the status of Mental Computation, it is also hoped to
be able to provide recommendations to the Department on any inservice
needs which may be identified.
/2
469
470
Please complete the appropriate section below and return in the envelope
provided (by Monday, 18 October) to:
Geoff Morgan
Lawnton State School
P.O. Box 2
LAWNTON 4501
Phone:
Fax:
_____
_____
_____
OR
Please DO NOT SEND the questionnaire on Mental
Computation.
471
D.3
Yours sincerely
472
D.4
Dear Colleague
I am writing to you with respect to the survey of Queensland state primary
school teachers and administrators on Mental Computation that I am
currently undertaking, to which documentation sent earlier this term referred.
A couple of schools have indicated that they wish to participate in the survey,
but have mislaid my initial letter. On the off-chance that your school may be
in a similar situation, I have enclosed 6 copies of the questionnaire. If you, or
any of your staff members, are prepared to complete the questionnaire it
would be greatly appreciated. I have enclosed a Reply Paid envelope in
which any completed questionnaires may be returned.
Hopefully the survey will not take too long to complete. For those who have
been teaching since the mid-1960s, to which all sections may apply, it is
anticipated that it should take around 15-20 minutes of their time.
As indicated in my original letter, all information received will be treated
confidentially. It will constitute a valuable contribution to the knowledge about
the teaching of Mental Computation in Queensland during the last quartercentury.
Once again, your assistance, and that of the other members of your school's
staff who complete the survey, is greatly appreciated. Could any completed
questionnaires please be returned by Friday, 26 November.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
Geoff Morgan
P.S.
Should you have already posted the form, which was included with
my previous letter, indicating that your school did not want to receive
any questionnaires, please disregard this mailing.
473
D.5
Yours sincerely
Geoff Morgan
474
APPENDIX E
Item
3a
4
5a
6
8a
9
Mean
2.89
3.17
2.63
3.17
2.89
3.24
Std Dev.
.72
.56
.74
.59
.65
.55
Mean
2.32
3.18
3.24
Std Dev.
.67
.50
.55
Mean
3.31
2.16
2.26
2.45
3.50
3.06
2.92
3.37
Std Dev.
.55
.68
.65
.76
.50
.66
.70
.51
Mean
3.55
3.50
2.30
1.79
3.32
2.13
3.18
1.60
Std Dev.
.55
.60
.75
.61
.61
.70
.77
.69
Mean
2.78
2.78
1.64
1.58
2.62
1.47
Std Dev.
41b
42b
43ba
44ba
45ba
46ba
3.14
3.09
1.81
1.64
2.65
1.53
.76
.81
.73
.65
.88
.55
41c
42c
43ca
44ca
45ca
46ca
3.31
3.27
1.89
1.86
2.69
1.73
.72
.77
.70
.72
.95
.66
1.08
1.02
.87
.80
1.05
.62
475
Figure 4.6: Selected teaching practices and beliefs of middle- and upperschool teachers.
Current Teaching Practices
Item
Mean
Std Dev.
25
3.55
3.50
26
29
31
34
36
Note.
Current Beliefs
Item
Mean
Std Dev.
.55
14
3.27
.52
.60
19
3.46
.50
2.98
.63
2.30
.75
20
3.32
.61
22
3.18
1.60
.77
.69
3.26
.50
2.87
.67
2.63
.70