Teaching Children How to Use Language to Solve Maths Problems
Abstract
It is often claimed that working and talking with partners while carrying out maths activities is beneficial to students’ learning and the development of their mathematical understanding. However, observational research has shown that primary school children often do not work productively in group-based classroom activities, with the implication that they lack the necessary skills to manage their joint activity. The research we describe investigated these issues and also explored the role of the teacher in guiding the development of children’s skills in using language as a tool for reasoning. It involved an interventional teaching programme called Thinking Together, designed to enable children to talk and reason together effectively. The results obtained indicate that children can be enabled to use talk more effectively as a tool for reasoning; and that talk-based group activities can help the development of individuals’ mathematical reasoning, understanding and problem-solving. The results also encourage the view that the teacher of mathematics can play an important role in the development of children’s awareness and use of language as a tool for reasoning. We suggest some ways that this role can be carried out most effectively.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Mercer and colleagues' Thinking Together programme supports the fifth theme, with awareness of good practice achieved through negotiation and display of ground rules integral to their positive findings.
“While obtaining parallel results with their extended Thinking Together programme, Mercer and colleagues also support the fifth theme: integral to their positive findings was the awareness of good practice achieved through negotiation and display of such 'ground rules' as 'We give reasons to explain our ideas' and 'If we disagree, we ask why'.”
From Teacher–Student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching: Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes? (2019) · cites this paper as Mercer & Sams, 2006
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 41 · Cited by 314
- Authors
- Mercer, N., & Sams, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- The Open University (GB)
- ORCID
- Mercer, Neil
- Venue
- Language and Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-11-15
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 507-528
- ISSN
- 0950-0782 (ISSN-L)
- 1747-7581
- OpenAlex
- W2144863293
- Cited by
- 314
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 16 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 16.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language and Education (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Cambridge
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Mathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Keywords
- mathematical reasoning, group work, peer talk, primary school mathematics, mathematical problem solving, teacher role, cooperative learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review