Conceptual and procedural instruction in mathematics: A content analysis from 1970 to 2020

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorBruun, Faye
dc.contributor.authorLofland, Kimberly
dc.contributor.committeeMemberLynch-Davis, Kathleen
dc.contributor.committeeMemberValadez, Corinne
dc.contributor.committeeMemberSeidel, Steven
dc.creator.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6533-2469en_US
dc.date.accessioned2022-04-15T12:53:46Z
dc.date.available2022-04-15T12:53:46Z
dc.date.issued2021-12
dc.description.abstractMathematics scores on the 2019 National Assessment of Education Progress increased by only two points for both fourth and eighth grade students since 2007, indicating that students continue to struggle in mathematics (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2007; U.S. Department of Education, 2019). The development of both conceptual and procedural knowledge is crucial to student success, as such, it is imperative that educators remain informed of past and current research in conceptual and procedural knowledge so they may make important instructional decisions regarding the focus and sequence of instruction. This research employed a quantitative content analysis to analyze and describe the extent to which mathematics instruction that emphasizes conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge, both conceptual and procedural knowledge, progression from conceptual to procedural knowledge, and progression from procedural to conceptual knowledge in mathematics have been positioned within the publications of the Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (JRME) and Educational Studies in Mathematics (ESM) research journals. Results indicate that research pertaining to conceptual and procedural knowledge remained consistent from 1988 to 2020, focusing mostly on conceptual knowledge development, incorporating constructivist practices that require students to make connections, notice patterns and relationships, and explain their thinking. The second most common focus was on developing both conceptual and procedural knowledge, incorporating both behaviorist and constructivist practices.en_US
dc.description.collegeCollege of Education and Human Developmenten_US
dc.description.departmentEducational Leadership, Curriculum & Instructionen_US
dc.format.extent166 pagesen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1969.6/90432
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsThis material is made available for use in research, teaching, and private study, pursuant to U.S. Copyright law. The user assumes full responsibility for any use of the materials, including but not limited to, infringement of copyright and publication rights of reproduced materials. Any materials used should be fully credited with its source. All rights are reserved and retained regardless of current or future development or laws that may apply to fair use standards. Permission for publication of this material, in part or in full, must be secured with the author and/or publisher.en_US
dc.subjectconceptual knowledgeen_US
dc.subjectconcrete-representational-abstracten_US
dc.subjectcraen_US
dc.subjectexplicit instructionen_US
dc.subjectprocedural knowledgeen_US
dc.titleConceptual and procedural instruction in mathematics: A content analysis from 1970 to 2020en_US
dc.typeTexten_US
dc.type.genreDissertationen_US
dcterms.typeText
thesis.degree.disciplineCurriculum & Instructionen_US
thesis.degree.grantorTexas A & M University--Corpus Christien_US
thesis.degree.levelDoctoralen_US
thesis.degree.nameDoctor of Philosophyen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Lofland_Kimberly_Dissertation.pdf
Size:
1.94 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Dissertation
Download

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.72 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Dissertations
College of Education and Human Development Theses and Dissertations