It appears to be a rather common impression that teaching elementary mathematics is … well, rather elementary. I mean, the mathematics is quite simple, so how hard can it be? In this article, Wu provides a very nice introduction to how challenging it can actually be. In the introductory part of the article, he claims: “The fact is, there’s a lot more to teaching math than teaching how to do calculations.” In the article, he provides examples of how hard it can actually be to teach something as “elementary” as place value and fractions.

I am tempted to quote more or less the entire article, because so many interesting issues are presented here, but I will not. I am, however, going to recommend that you take the time and read this excellent article. If you are somewhat interested in teaching mathematics, I am sure you will find this interesting!

Thanks a lot to Assistant Editor Jennifer Dubin for telling me about this article, by the way! I appreciate it 🙂

In this study, we aim to examine and discuss approaches and practices in developing mathematics textbooks in China, with a special focus on the development of secondary school mathematics textbook in the context of recent school mathematics reform. Textbook development in China has its own history. This study reveals some common practices and approaches developed and used in selecting, presenting and organizing content in mathematics textbooks over the years. With the recent curriculum reform taking place in China, we also discuss some new developments in compiling and publishing high school mathematics textbooks. Implications obtained from Chinese practices in textbook development are then discussed in a broad context.

In our research work, we have looked at the way in which artefacts become, for teachers as well as for students, instruments of their mathematical activity. The issues related to the use of tools and technologies in mathematical education are now widely considered. A look to history highlights the different ways in which the same questions have been studied at different times and in different places. This suggests that the contribution of artefacts to mathematics learning should be considered in terms of various contexts. Our “visits” to these contexts will be guided by the coordination of two main theoretical frameworks, the instrumental approach and the semiotic mediation approach from the perspective of mathematics laboratory. This journey through history and schooling represents a good occasion to address some questions: Are there “good” contexts in which to develop mathematical instruments? Are there “good” teaching practices which assist students’ instrumental geneses and construct mathematical meanings? How is it possible to promote such teaching practices? Some study cases are discussed.

• CREATING OPTIMAL MATHEMATICS LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS: COMBINING ARGUMENTATION AND WRITING TO ENHANCE ACHIEVEMENT, by Dionne I. Cross
• APPROACHES TO TEACHING MATHEMATICS IN LOWER-ACHIEVING CLASSES, by Ruhama Even and Tova Kvatinsky
• ANALYSIS OF THE LEARNING EXPECTATIONS RELATED TO GRADE 1–8 MEASUREMENT IN SOME COUNTRIES, by Jung Chih Chen, Barbara J. Reys and Robert E. Reys
• EPISTEMOLOGICAL OBSTACLES IN COMING TO UNDERSTAND THE LIMIT OF A FUNCTION AT UNDERGRADUATE LEVEL: A CASE FROM THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LESOTHO, by Eunice Kolitsoe Moru

Empirical findings show that many students do not achieve the level of a flexible and adaptive use of arithmetic computation strategies during the primary school years. Accordingly, educators suggest a reform-based instruction to improve students’ learning opportunities. In a study with 245 German third graders learning by textbooks with different instructional approaches, we investigate accuracy and adaptivity of students’ strategy use when adding and subtracting three-digit numbers. The findings indicate that students often choose efficient strategies provided they know any appropriate strategies for a given problem. The proportion of appropriate and efficient strategies students use differs with respect to the instructional approach of their textbooks. Learning with an investigative approach, more students use appropriate strategies, whereas children following a problem-solving approach show a higher competence in adaptive strategy choice. Based on these results, we hypothesize that different instructional approaches have different advantages and disadvantages regarding the teaching and learning of adaptive strategy use.

The flexible and adaptive use of strategies and representations is part of a cognitive variability, which enables individuals to solve problems quickly and accurately. The development of these abilities is not simply based on growing experience; instead, we can assume that their acquisition is based on complex cognitive processes. How these processes can be described and how these can be fostered through instructional environments are research questions, which are yet to be answered satisfactorily. This special issue on flexible and adaptive use of strategies and representations in mathematics education encompasses contributions of several authors working in this particular field. They present recent research on flexible and adaptive use of strategies or representations based on theoretical and empirical perspectives. Two commentary articles discuss the presented results against the background of existing theories.

In this paper, we focus on Finnish pre-service elementary teachers’ (N = 269) and upper secondary students’ (N = 1,434) understanding of division. In the questionnaire, we used the following non-standard division problem: “We know that 498:6 = 83. How could you conclude from this relationship (without using long-division algorithm) what 491:6 = ? is?” This problem especially measures conceptual understanding, adaptive reasoning, and procedural fluency. Based on the results, we can conclude that division seems not to be fully understood: 45% of the pre-service teachers and 37% of upper secondary students were able to produce complete or mainly correct solutions. The reasoning strategies used by these two groups did not differ very much. We identified four main reasons for problems in understanding this task: (1) staying on the integer level, (2) an inability to handle the remainder, (3) difficulties in understanding the relationships between different operations, and (4) insufficient reasoning strategies. It seems that learners’ reasoning strategies in particular play a central role when teachers try to improve learners’ proficiency.