Mathing: Focusing on the Process through Writing and Discourse

Steven Mijajlovic
Master of Science in Education Program
Northwestern University
August 2014















Mijajlovic, 2

Table of Contents
Rationale ......................................................................................................................................... 4
Review of Literature ..................................................................................................................... 10
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 10
Domain One: Mental Math ....................................................................................................... 12
Domain Two: Math Writing ...................................................................................................... 16
Domain Three: Math Discourse ................................................................................................ 20
Summary ................................................................................................................................... 23
Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 24
Data Analysis and Interpretation .................................................................................................. 27
Pen-Pal Letter Writing .............................................................................................................. 31
Table White Boards ................................................................................................................... 35
End-of-Year Student Reflection ................................................................................................ 39
Data Analysis and Interpretation Summary .............................................................................. 43
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 44
References ..................................................................................................................................... 49
Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 51
Math Talk Frequency (Number of Methods) Handout ............................................................. 51
Math Talk Frequency (Number of Methods) Student Work ..................................................... 52
Pen-Pal Letter Writing Example ............................................................................................... 56
Mijajlovic, 3

Student Reflections ................................................................................................................... 62
Table White Board Pictures ...................................................................................................... 68

Table of Figures
Figure 1: Student Growth (Number of Methods Measured per Quarter) Analysis ...................... 29
Figure 2: Number of Methods per Quarter -- Box Plot ................................................................ 30
Figure 3: Letter Writing: Number of Unique Methods ................................................................. 34
Figure 4: Number of Methods on White Boards Analysis ........................................................... 37

Table of Tables
Table 1: Pen-Pal Letter Writing Analysis ..................................................................................... 32
Table 2: End of Year Student Reflection Analysis ....................................................................... 40


















Mijajlovic, 4

Rationale
I have always been interested in the benefits of written and oral discourse in a
mathematics classroom and the effects of routine mental math practice. As a student, writing
helped me organize my thoughts, solidify my understanding of topics, helped me develop a
deeper understanding, and gave me a place to write down my questions which I would be able to
revisit and answer later. Additionally, as a student I loved showing off my speed and efficiency
of my mental math skills effective mental math skills greatly helped me with understanding
mathematical concepts and helped me succeed in the classroom.
My question combines two areas I am passionate about: discourse and mental math.
These two particular areas are ones which students, young adults, and professionals can always
improve upon, and through a consistent mental math routine and daily discussion about the
mental math, I can learn a great deal about my students and from my students. This led me to
my question: Does writing and small group discourse about mental math develop mathematical
number sense among seventh graders?
My initial question focused on writing about mathematics in the classroom; however, as I
read more research and thought more about my own classroom and students needs, I wanted to
explore the effects of writing and discourse. As a result, my Masters Project Question is
comprised of three domains: mental math, math writing, and math discourse. Each of these
domains contributes critical pieces of evidence and support in order to further develop an
understanding of my question and attempt to resolve it. The further I explore and develop an
understanding of each of these domains, the better I can resolve my question. My domain about
mental math will explore what mental mathematics looks and sounds like in the classroom and
what effects it has on students. Similarly, my domains about math writing and math discourse
will explore what writing about mathematics looks like and what mathematical discussion
Mijajlovic, 5

sounds like. Additionally, the domains will explore what benefits and effects writing about and
discussing mathematics has on students in a mathematics classroom.
My first domain is mental math which will further explore the benefits of doing mental
math on a routine basis in the classroom, and how it develops a strong number sense and
develops number relationships. This domain is comprised of four sub-questions: 1. What is
mental math? 2. What are the benefits of mental math? 3. Does mental math help students
develop a conceptual understanding? 4. What is number sense? Mental math is being able to
either do the math quickly mentally or come up with an estimate mentally, no pen and paper,
providing a check point as the students work through the actual problem using mental math.
Some things to consider are as follows: what would a reasonable answer look like, what are the
approximate values the solution should be between, and what answers are not possible. By
asking these questions, it helps develop number sense, which is recognizing the components a
larger number is made up of (one, tens, hundreds, etc.) and eliminating unlikely solutions.
Ideally, this will help students develop a conceptual understanding through number
manipulation.
The second domain is math writing which will explore the importance and benefit of
writing your thought processes down in order to develop a deeper understanding and clarify your
own thinking. This domain is comprised of five sub-questions: 1. What is math writing? 2.
How does writing affect math fluency? 3. What are the effects of writing down your thought
processes? 4. What are the benefits of being able to write and reflect, then be able to read
another persons thoughts and methods? 5. Does letter writing push students to test theories and
ask their pen-pal questions they otherwise would not have asked? Math writing is verbalizing
your thought process and explaining the steps that were taken to solve the particular problem.
Mijajlovic, 6

The idea behind this is that when students are writing about their process, they are reengaging
themselves in the process and revisiting their steps, which helps internalize and formalize the
process. Additionally, because writing and responding to another peer has a delayed effect, the
students are able to reflect on their process and writing when reading their initial response and
their peers response. This may help students view their process in a different manner or help
develop questions and theories about solving the problem in another way.
The third domain is math discourse which will explore the importance of student led
conversation to develop their own understanding and eliminate misconceptions. This domain is
comprised of three sub-questions: 1. What is math discussion? 2. How does discussion and
discourse help students? 3. Does discourse help student develop a conceptual understanding?
Math discourse is the discussion that occurs between students, whether it is analyzed through
oral dialogue or written dialogue. When students share ideas and methods with one another, they
are often prompted by their peers to re-explain in another way or explain in a way that makes
more sense to the students themselves. This process of discussing and explaining their own work
could help students develop a stronger conceptual understanding of their own problem solving
process.
I meet with my students twice per week for 105-minute blocks. Every class period starts
with a mental Math Talk. This is a daily routine that I never grow tired of it, and the students
never grow tired of it, mainly because everyone can learn something new from this basic, yet
complex, activity. Students are given a multiplication problem at the class baseline skill level
(ie: 7
th
grade math: ) and are asked to silently compute as many different
methods to get to the solution in their minds. This activity pushes students to be creative, think
Mijajlovic, 7

in a different manner to solve the problem, and forces students to work on their short term
memory by keeping track of the numbers and varying methods.
Logistically, we get the answer out of the way as soon as the three minute window is
up. This opens up conversation about the process right or wrong, as a class, students share and
listen to what the other students were thinking, how the other students computed the problem
mentally and manipulated the numbers which made up the problem.
Many students start the year off using mathematical algorithms they have learned, and
quickly realize that it is difficult to keep track of carrying numbers in their minds and the
process of addition can quickly get jumbled. Students progressively work toward breaking up
the numbers which make up the problem, and manipulate it in a way which is easy to keep track
of mentally, and can be added up quickly. Regrouping, or chunking, the numbers in a way that
are more manageable for us to work with mentally can give us a great advantage when trying to
compute values mentally.
This leads to the discussion about how applicable math really is. Given what seems to be
a simple problem, how can we solve it using basic information we know about what is given,
how can we solve the problem in another way, and how can we create a mental relationship
between these numbers to make sense of them in our mind. We should not have to bring out pen
and paper or a calculator to figure out a problem in a real life setting; however, we should be able
to chunk the information that is given into parts that makes sense to us, and manipulate them in
a way that we can get to a solution. Problem solving, creativity, and perseverance are critical
characteristics for any individual and successful professional in our present world. A routine like
this can really delve deeper into the student thought process and create a high level of fluency for
our students.
Mijajlovic, 8

This higher level of thinking ties directly in with the Common Core State Standards and
the eight standard Mathematical Practices and Habits of Mind, in addition to our schools
mission about educating the whole child.
To start, the students must make sense of a multiplication problem and persevere through
solving it in multiple ways instilling the idea that one, two, or three methods is not sufficient
really pushes student thinking and encourages creative and flexible thinking. Additionally, the
simple fact that students cannot write anything down during this activity forces them to really
focus and think about what is happening, and strategize a plan of attack.
While strategizing their plan of attack, students quickly realize that basic multiplication
algorithms do not make sense in terms of what is happening this activity helps students make
sense of the algorithm all the while creating their own new methods of number manipulation.
Students quickly try making the numbers more accessible and relevant, such as rounding one of
the numbers up or down to a multiple of ten, or making the numbers relevant in terms of money
by using ideas of counting quarters which are multiples of twenty-five.
Students are expected to be able to communicate and develop a clear explanation for their
thinking. During the discussion, the students are expected to be very clear and explicit with their
methods and wording, and expected to use precise and exact language in math. Additionally, I
am consistently asking the students to explain why their method works, where a particular
number or inference came from, and simply asking them to explain further pushes student
communication and argumentation.
The students are not given any specific directives about how to arrive at the solution.
The only restrictions before discussion are that the students cannot use paper and pencil, and the
solution must be arrived at using mental math. The journey to get to the solution is entirely left
Mijajlovic, 9

up to the student and their own thinking. Students are essentially looking for patterns that are
visible to them as they work through the multiplication discussion problems. The students begin
to make connections back to the idea of fact families and the power of multiples of ten. As
they pick up on these self-discovered patterns, old and new mathematical patterns are discussed.
Throughout the year, the students began to see the big picture of the mental math talks;
rather than this isolated mental math activity only occurring at the beginning of class, the
students started using it to do standard multiplication as opposed to their old algorithm method.
Additionally, students began to generalize patterns and start testing these patterns to see if these
methods can work in other areas of mathematics which develops a curious thinker and problem
solver.
This ten minute activity, three minutes of mental math and seven minutes of discussion,
can be taken even further to help students develop an even stronger understanding. Not only is
math applicable in everyday life, discourse may be even more important.
Being able to convey clear and concise explanations of the processes which were used to
solve a given problem is an extremely important skill set for any individual planning to succeed
in the real world. As successful members of society, we must often verbalize our reasoning for
any strategies we use to solve a problem, we must be able to justify why, and we must be able to
answer questions and points of doubt, often needing data points to back up our processes.
Having the students practice writing, discussing, sharing ideas, and defending their thoughts
about their problem solving strategies and processes could greatly increase their mathematical
number sense.
As with anything that you practice in life, my assumption would be that the students will
increase their understanding of the mental math process and their repertoire of methods will
Mijajlovic, 10

grow over the course of the year. This could be powerful for many students considering many
mathematics teachers have asked them to show their work now the students get to showcase
their ability to do mental math. This ideology could reinvigorate some students who have been
discouraged by the rote and routine dynamics of their past mathematics courses.
Review of Literature
Introduction
My Masters Project Question, Does writing and small group discourse about mental
math develop mathematical number sense among seventh graders?, is comprised of three
domains: mental math, math writing, and math discourse. Each of these domains contributes
critical pieces of evidence and support in order to further develop an understanding of my
question and attempt to answer it. In this section of my paper, I will explore each domain in
depth and support its importance and how it ties in with my research question.
My first domain is mental math which will further explore the benefits of doing mental
math on a routine basis in the classroom, and how it develops a strong number sense and
develops number relationships. The second domain is math writing which will explore the
importance and benefit of writing your thought processes down in order to develop a deeper
understanding and clarify your own thinking. The third domain is math discourse which will
explore the importance of student led conversation to develop their own understanding and
eliminate misconceptions.
As explained in the Rationale, in order to develop greater meaning for each domain, I
have developed several sub-questions which I will keep in mind. The sub-questions are intended
to help me further explore the overarching domain and create a better understanding of the
domain itself.
Mijajlovic, 11

Domain 1: Mental math
This domain is comprised of four sub-questions: 1. What is mental math? 2. What are the
benefits of mental math? 3. Does mental math help students develop a conceptual
understanding? 4. What is number sense?
Mental math is being able to either do the math quickly mentally or come up with an
estimate mentally, no pen and paper, providing a check point as the students work through the
actual problem using mental math. Some things to consider are as follows: what would a
reasonable answer look like, what are the approximate values the solution should be between,
and what answers are not possible. By asking these questions, it helps develop number sense,
which is recognizing the components a larger number is made up of (one, tens, hundreds, etc.)
and eliminating unlikely solutions. Ideally, this will help students develop a conceptual
understanding through number manipulation.
Domain 2: Math writing
This domain is comprised of five sub-questions: 1. What is math writing? 2. How does
writing affect math fluency? 3. What are the effects of writing down your thought processes?
4. What are the benefits of being able to write and reflect, then be able to read another persons
thoughts and methods? 5. Does letter writing push students to test theories and ask their pen-pal
questions they otherwise would not have asked?
Math writing is verbalizing your thought process and explaining the steps that were taken
to solve the particular problem. The idea behind this is that when students are writing about their
process, they are reengaging themselves in the process and revisiting their steps, which helps
internalize and formalize the process. Additionally, because writing and responding to another
peer has a delayed effect, the students are able to reflect on their process and writing when
Mijajlovic, 12

reading their initial response and their peers response. This may help students view their
process in a different manner or help develop questions and theories about solving the problem
in another way.
Domain 3: Math discourse
This domain is comprised of three sub-questions: 1. What is math discussion? 2. How does
discussion and discourse help students? 3. Does discourse help student develop a conceptual
understanding?
Math discourse is the discussion that occurs between students, whether it is analyzed through
oral dialogue or written dialogue. When students share ideas and methods with one another, they
are often prompted by their peers to re-explain in another way or explain in a way that makes
more sense to the students themselves. This process of discussing and explaining their own work
could help students develop a stronger conceptual understanding of their own problem solving
process.
Domain One: Mental Math
Mental math is comprised of one or more calculations that are done in a student's head
without the use of pencil and paper, calculators or other aids, such as multiplication charts.
Mental math is used as a way to calculate and estimate quickly, using math facts that a student
has memorized, such as multiplication, division or doubles facts. It can also be extended to
problems that are not accessible through memorization, but solved through number manipulation
or a series of smaller mental computations. According to Seeley (2005), mental math is often
associated with the ability to do computations quickly, but in its broadest sense, mental math also
involves conceptual understanding and problem solving (p.1).
Mijajlovic, 13

Burns (2007) and Choppin (2012), in addition to other researchers, all are in support of
mental mathematics and the overall benefits of mental math. This section will clear up any
misconceptions about mental math itself. Doing mental math in school is often frowned upon,
and students constantly hear teachers tell them, show your work. If a student can manipulate
the numbers in a problem and do it mentally using number relationships, they are showing a
deeper understanding than using some algorithm which is memorized and meaningless.
Working mentally with numbers is a great way to nurture number sense and create a good
foundation for mathematics (May, 1995). When students are regrouping numbers and
chunking the numbers (reorganizing numbers into smaller pieces which make more sense to
the student or provide greater meaning) in a way to make more sense to them, students are
working on number sense. Whether the student is rounding the numbers in the problem to get a
gauge if their answer is realistic, or if the students are breaking down the numbers into more
manageable and appropriate numbers for mental math then building them back up to their final
solution, in either case, students are creating their own understanding of number sense and
deepening their understanding by using their own methods and statements as they explain their
varying methods.
Mathematics is much more than a list of steps and procedures we memorize and follow;
however, students see mathematics as exactly that. Parrish (2011) suggests students view math
as a collection of rules and procedures to memorize instead of a system of relations to investigate
and understand. Students are continuously taught to use an algorithm or one particular method to
solve one particular problem; however, what students do not often understand is why they are
doing what this recipe tells them to do, or that there are several different ways to solve one
problem and still arrive at the same or correct solution. Because students have developed this
Mijajlovic, 14

relationship with mathematics as a subject of right or wrong and a list of procedural steps, it is
difficult for them to get back on the path of investigation and exploration of number
relationships.
According to Parrish (2011), students mathematics experiences have mainly focused on
learning and practicing algorithms, and they may be resistant to looking at problems from other
perspectives (p. 204). The Number Talk tries to chip away at this problem, encouraging students
to do mental math and encouraging students to come up with multiple methods of arriving at the
same solution. Not only are students encouraged to use mental math, but they are also
encouraged to solve the problem multiple ways; the Number Talk helps students understand that
the real interest lies in the process, not the solution. Simply defined, number talks are five to
fifteen minutes classroom conversations around purposefully crafted computation problems that
are solved mentally to encourage students to work on their mental math skills (Parrish, 2011, p.
204). By promoting multiple methods students can check their initial solution, discover a
method that may be easier, build a stronger number sense, and making sense of daily
mathematics. The students take ownership of multiple methods that work for them, not just one-
size-fits-all algorithm they are told to use. Rubenstein (2001) suggests making mental math a
high priority in classes is an asset to all of her students. The students become liberated from
calculator dependence, build confidence in doing mathematics, become more flexible thinkers,
and are more able to use multiple approaches to problem solving.
The main goal of Number Talks and mental math in general, is to push students away
from replicating an algorithm and encourage them to use creative and flexible strategies which
stress the importance of number sense and place value. Mental computation helps strengthen
students understanding of place value. By looking at numbers as whole quantities instead of
Mijajlovic, 15

discrete columns of digits, students must use their knowledge and understanding of place value
(Parrish, 2011, p. 204). When students are manipulating larger numbers and regrouping the
numbers into more manageable chunks, or pieces, of information, students are working on place
value and number sense without even realizing it. When replicating some algorithm, students are
mindlessly going through a memorized procedure, or recipe, and getting some number they refer
to as the answer. However, during Number Talks and mental math, students must recognize
what each number is made up, once again reinforcing the importance of number sense and
regrouping numbers into chunks that make more sense to us. For example, a student will look at
the number 24 and recognize that it is made up of two tens and four ones, or one twenty and four
ones, etc. in order to work with numbers that are easier to manipulate and keep track of during
numerous operations.
Mental math is critical for the students success in the classroom and outside of the
classroom. In the everyday real world individuals face situations that call for adding, subtracting
multiplying, or dividing. From tips in restaurants, deciding when to leave home to be on time,
estimating grocery bills, and figuring ingredient amounts for recipes. Being able to estimate and
figure out solutions mentally is an important life skill, and should have a regular role in math
classrooms (Burns, 2007). Further supporting the importance of being able to manipulate
numbers and use mental math in everyday situations, May (1995) claims that working mentally
with numbers is a great way to nurture number sense and create a strong foundation for
mathematics. Using daily mental math strategies of regrouping, chunking, and looking for
shortcuts can develop strong mental mathematics skills in the students.
Mijajlovic, 16

Domain Two: Math Writing
Math writing can be anything from summarizing the days lesson, journaling on a daily or
weekly basis, or even writing to another peer and engaging in written discourse about
mathematics. Kostos (2010) suggests that when students write down their thoughts, a stronger
understanding is developed through the process of organizing and verbalizing ideas in a concrete
manner.
An interactive form of math writing is peer-to-peer letter writing, which is a form of
journaling. Letter writing is a fun way to help students take ownership of their writing, and an
easy way to facilitate discussion between peers without judgment. Crespo (2003) suggests
writing can serve as an effective tool to help students organize their thoughts, and formulate their
own ideas and concepts. If students can verbalize an explanation, they will understand it more.
Additionally, the journal gives each student an opportunity to solidify their thoughts through
multiple representations. Findings of the study indicated that the use of math journals positively
influenced the students communication of mathematical thinking and the use of math
vocabulary. Getting the students to explain the concept of subtraction, addition, multiplication,
and division rather than explaining a method of calculation gets the students to the concepts over
the algorithms (Kostos & Shin, 2010). It is important to get the students to think about the
process and developing a deeper understanding. Developing and understanding of the process
helps students develop an understanding of the algorithm, which in turn helps students develop
number sense and make connections between mathematics and the world around them.
According to Pugalee (1998), writing is the one of the most effective vehicles of learning for
students. Writing encourages the level of cognitive activity which maximizes the potential of the
learner to successfully modify and restructure mathematical knowledge (p.20). In order to make
sense of the math concepts the students are using, the student writer must own the math content,
Mijajlovic, 17

manipulate it in a way which makes sense to them, and then be able to explain it. Writing and
problem solving are intrinsically linked. Problem solving and writing processes are similar with
each other involving distinct phases which tend to be recursive rather than linear (Pugalee, 1998,
p. 21). In order to effectively convey understanding through writing, one must understand the
content to a level where precise language is used accurately and the explanation which follows is
in a concise manner for the audience to interpret with ease. Writing essentially creates an avenue
for students to solidify their learning, keep an accurate record of it, and be able to internalize all
the real-world mathematical connections that are developed.
Additionally, writing about mathematics helps students be self-reflective and develop a
deeper understanding about the content. According to several students from Wills (1993)
writing to learn is something that students dont think about. Students do it thinking it is an
assignment but it helps them gather their thoughts into planned out explanations. Another
student from the same article claimed to use writing to analyze, memorize, study, summarize,
focus on key ideas, express feelings, take notes, answer questions, record their thoughts and to
clarify & organize their ideas. Students basically use writing to record their thought process,
which helps them learn. Writing is also a tool for discovery in mathematics, one student from
this article wrote, It [writing in mathematics] teaches me how to learn. When I write I get lots
of ideas of what else I want to say When I write, I get more ideas See, I know what Im
going to write, but by the time I get to a part, I get a new idea (Whitin & Whitin, 2000, p. 118).
Time and time again, writing is used as a tool to help students through the learning
process. Studies indicate that even students with below-average writing skills become better
learners when they write about what they are learning. As students self-concepts as learners
improve, so do their grades (Wills, 1993, p. 131). As students use their writing as a vehicle to
Mijajlovic, 18

express their thoughts and make them concrete, the writing reinforces what was happening as
they solved a particular problem, allowing them to revisit and reflect on their procedure creating
an opportunity for the student writer to refine and explore their methods deeper.
According to Crespo (2003), research has found that writing activities that target
audiences other than the teacher are more generative and appealing to students. Writing letters to
someone outside the classroom who is not the teacher or a classmate creates opportunities for
students to practice and improve their [student] mathematical communication. The improvement
of mathematical communication translates to stronger or higher math fluency. The more
efficient students are at communicating their ideas and thought processes, the better they will
become at the activity. This writing promotes student engagement and it enhances their overall
attitude and personal construction of the subject. Since writing provides a safe place for students
to reflect and discuss, all the students can participate, and not just the dominant few (Phillips &
Crespo, 1995). Writing, whether it is letter writing or journaling, provides each student a safe
outlet to gather and formulate their thoughts, and a critical opportunity to reflect and develop a
deeper understanding.
In addition, according to Norton and Kastberg (2011), getting more student engagement
through writing is an invaluable benefit. Letter writing provides delayed responses between the
class discussions, the written explanation, and finally followed by a response the next class
period. Students get an opportunity to think and reflect about their reasoning and processes.
This period of time can help both the reader and writer develop further understanding about the
concepts. In fact, letter writing projects can provide especially rich opportunities to students
thinking because the delayed, recorded interactions allow time to reflect on both the task and
student thinking (Norton & Kastberg, 2012, p. 100).
Mijajlovic, 19

In a mathematics classroom students can have great discussion on a daily basis, however,
some of the most critical observations and discussion points are lost and forgotten because there
is no record of it every happening. However, writing not only allows students time to formulate
and make their thoughts concrete, but it also captures the students thought process and
reasoning in a given moment, which can be powerful and useful for students and teachers to
revisit and reflect on. Writing shares many of the qualities of talking, but it has some unique
characteristics of its own, such as creating a record of our thinking that we can analyze and
reflect upon. Talking and writing enable learners to develop a personal voice (Whitin & Whitin,
2000, p. 3). Writing increases creativity, which in turn helps us generate more ideas, and then
our ideas give others bigger ideas. Writing about mathematics forces one to be a thinker and a
learner about the content. This discourse between the two writers develops a life of its own, and
evolves into a great learning experience for both sides. Letter writing pushes students to test
theories and ask their pen-pal questions they otherwise would not have asked. According to
Whitlin & Whitlin (2000),
Learners are active constructors of their own knowledge; they are
meaning-makers who are always making sense of problem situations by
connecting them to what they already know. Learners can represent their
ideas through many forms of expression. Oral language, written language,
mathematics, as well as drama, art, and music, are important channels for
learners to express what they know about the world. Learners construct
knowledge in a social context (p. 7).
Through this process of writing, students can create their own opportunities to create relevant
connections to the world they live in.
Mijajlovic, 20

During this time of independent writing, the writing supports student thinking by
providing them with an outlet to record their thoughts and solidify their understanding and
explore any new ideas.
Writing prolongs students interaction with subject matter and help them
focus on key ideas and information writing helps students go beyond
memorization of facts and concepts by allowing them to use information
and see how it fits with what they know and need to learn. When students
are writing about your subject area, they are thinking about it as well
(Wills, 1993, p. 128).
The more time students spend thinking about how they can become better at a certain skill, in
this case mental mathematicians, and the more time they reflect on the actual practice of it, the
more likely their skills will improve.
Domain Three: Math Discourse
Discussions can take place in small groups or as a whole class. When viewing a
classroom as a community of learners, interaction among students is critical because
communication is necessary for building and developing understanding. According to
Vygotskys Social Development Theory, students learn through their interactions and
communications with their peers.
Burns (2007) suggests that in mathematics, it is not enough that students can manipulate
numbers and symbols and read math words. To be proficient, students must draw connections
between these symbols and what they represent. The standard for math should be the same as the
standard for readingbringing meaning to the printed symbols. Student discussion can develop
this connection and deeper understanding by creating situations where students make the
Mijajlovic, 21

connections by listening to each other, asking each other probing and clarifying questions, and
most importantly, responding and correcting one another. This type of discourse where students
ask each other questions and challenge their peers to prove their solutions can develop into deep
conceptual understanding.
According to Hutchinson (2010), there is strong evidence and support defending student
conversations and discussions about mathematics which helps solidify student understanding,
builds confidence, encourages participation and reduces math anxiety. Students naturally want
to share their ideas about how they went about solving a problem. However, they may not want
to share with twenty five others intently staring at them and judging them. When students are
provided an avenue to share and talk through their ideas, reasoning, and process with peers they
are comfortable with, a sense of confidence is developed and their rationale is confirmed. This
has great psychological benefits for students. The benefits of sharing and discussing
computation strategies are that it clarifies thinking, encourages students to investigate and apply
mathematical relationships, builds a repertoire of efficient strategies, and promotes considering
and testing other strategies (Parrish, 2011).
While the students are discussing and thinking about what they are writing, it forces other
students to listen and think about what other students are doing, and how the discourse shifts the
focus to analysis of other student work. The more students discuss, the more ideas they bounce
off one another, and use logic to solve problems. This provides an opportunity for other students
and the teacher to spot problems and misconceptions in students work just by listening and
asking the appropriate questions to help them through work through their misconceptions.
Another great benefit to small group discussion is that students learn to defend and prove
their method and solution. Argument literacy is central to being educated. It grants access to
Mijajlovic, 22

forms of intellectual capital that have a lot of power in the world (Singer, 2007, p. 1). Not only
are students working on mathematics and discussing their processes, but they are naturally
honing their reasoning and argumentative skills through the discussion with their peers.
Mathematical communication is an essential process for learning mathematics because through
communication, students reflect upon, clarify, and expand their ideas and understanding of
mathematical relationships and mathematical arguments (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2005, p.
1). Simply allowing students the opportunity to discuss their varying methods with their peers
can contribute a great deal to their understanding about their own process and their peers
processes. Additionally, this discussion that occurs hones students argumentative skills, while
allowing them to deepen their own understanding about the mathematics at hand.
Students are taught to look to the teacher for an answer, to ask the teacher what they
should do, and to ask the teacher what the next step is, but they should be asking themselves
those very questions, and then asking their peers. A Number Talks discussion does not stop once
the daily routine is over with --- the goal is much larger than the routine itself, and much larger
than the mathematics classroom. The goal is to develop critical thinkers and flexible problem
solvers who are willing to interpret problems from multiple perspectives and carve their own
path. The learning that the community can take away is invaluable. According to Knuth and
Peressini (2001), students will acquire a deeper understanding of mathematics when they use
their own statements, as well as those of their peers. Students gain a deeper conceptual
knowledge of mathematical ideas, increased resourcefulness, experience of challenging each
others thinking, experience of listening to someone elses opinion and synthesizing it with your
own, the ability to collaborate effectively, and the benefit of engaging in mathematical
conversations (Singer, 2007).
Mijajlovic, 23

Summary
Encouraging students to do mental mathematics provides opportunities for student
growth and development with their own number sense and development of number relationships,
which effectively cultivates mathematical skills and conceptual understanding for the students.
In addition to the important role that mental math plays in a math students development, math
writing and math discourse are of equal importance to the development of mathematics
understanding and most importantly providing students an outlet to work through their own
misconceptions and develop and understanding of why they are doing what they are doing.
Seeley (2005) suggests that mental math should not depend on rote memorization. In fact,
the development of mental models for numbers and operations is greatly facilitated by students
engaging in purposeful experiences with concrete objects and number patterns. Teachers play a
vital role in making sure that these experiences are connected in meaningful ways to the
mathematics we ask students to learn. Mental math is foundational for higher level mathematics,
helps students build conceptual understanding, and encourages students to manipulate numbers
and regroup numbers in order to make the problem easier to understand and more meaningful for
themselves. While students naturally reorganize the numbers within a problem to be more
effective problem solvers, they are further developing their number sense skills and conceptual
understanding.
Not only does mental math develop strong number sense, it also helps students
understand that mathematics is not a procedural subject. One does not need to follow a recipe to
get to the solution or to succeed in the subject. The mental math and number talks help students
focus on the process of the problem, which in turn promotes flexibility, creativity, and problem
solving skills.
Mijajlovic, 24

Students also use opportunities such as math discussion and writing about math to create
and strengthen their connections and understanding of how mathematics works in the world
around them. At first, students mathematical vocabulary and language may not be accurate, but
as students continue to work together and discuss with one another, their understanding of the
subject develops and their skills begin to evolve. When students are discussing their methods
and teaching one another, they are relearning their own methods.
Writing is a critical step to help students internalize and understand their own process.
Additionally, writing reinforces what students understand and believe, and provides them with
the opportunity to reflect and refine their thought process. Not only does this occur during the
writing process, but a very similar process occurs during discussion. Providing students an
opportunity to write about and orally discuss mathematics, students communication and use of
math vocabulary increases. In addition to their vocabulary increasing, their discussions lead to
questioning, which in turn develops argumentative skills and a deeper understanding through
these debates and explanations.
When students practice mental math, writing about math, and discuss math, their
conceptual understanding and number sense increases. According to Phillips & Crespo (1995),
communication is viewed as an integral part of mathematics instruction. Furthermore, it is
argued that in the process of communicating their ideas, students construct, refine, and
consolidate their mathematical understandings.
Data Collection
The data I collected and analyzed comes from 7
th
graders in an expanding school on the
northwest side of a large city in the Midwest. During the 2013-2014 school year, the school
housed 7
th
and 9
th
graders. However, it will be expanding each year until it reaches 7
th
-12
th

Mijajlovic, 25

graders. We have a double block schedule and I see my students twice per week for 105-
minutes.
The first piece of data I collected and analyzed is a frequency measure. Each student was
given one problem and asked to solve it as many different ways as possible in a given time
period which will provide me data on the varying methods used. The intent behind this
particular measure is to see if and how students understanding of multiplication and mental
math has advanced over the course of the year. I examined how many different methods
students used to arrive to the correct solution and this was done four times over the course of the
year.
This measure of unique methods used is extremely interesting to me because of the
mathematical development with number manipulation and number sense. Additionally, this
measure focused on, and stressed the importance of doing mathematics, as opposed to getting
to the solution and stopping with that. A great deal of knowledge and deeper level understanding
is acquired from the journey and experimentation of manipulating a problem rather than just
taking the known path. I distributed and collected data four times for this particular exercise,
once each quarter.
There is also an accuracy component to the data collection. I looked at the mental math
from a skill standpoint; this assessment is based off of similar style multiplication questions we
open up every class with. The students were not be able to show work, and were asked to
compute each question using mental math. My concern about this data point is that I do not have
a reference point, such as a pre-assessment. It is simply a score based on the accuracy of their
mental math skills with no comparison to a prior score. I also have my doubts about this
particular piece of data because I am less concerned with speed and accuracy and more
Mijajlovic, 26

concerned about the process and stressing the importance of understanding numerous ways to
come to a solution.
In class we used two pieces of writing and discourse: letter writing and table white board
writing. The discourse provided in the letter writing is silent and written, while the discourse
provided from the table white boards is oral conversation and written work on the boards.
For the letter writing, I looked at the written discourse occurring between the students. I
analyzed the students written interactions with one another. For example, is each student simply
writing a new letter with no regard to their pen pals questions and response, or is there actual
mathematical conversation and dialogue occurring within the letters about varying processes and
other mathematical explanations.
As for the writing on the white boards, I have pictures of the boards and student
discussions and explanations to go along with the pictures. Analysis of the pictures and student
discussions provided evidence and support for my third domain about discourse. I analyzed this
data to see if students were able to provide a sound argument and reasoning behind their process,
or if they simply know how to do it, but not verbalize what they were doing and why they were
doing it.
At the end of the year, I also gave a student survey based on how the students felt they
were impacted by the various Math Talk activities. The students were asked to which was
preferred: three minutes of mental math followed by seven minutes of teacher scribed discussion,
three minutes of mental math followed by seven minutes of pen pal letter writing, or three
minutes of mental math and seven minutes of table board discussion. This provided me with
student insight about the process and how they felt about it, and if they felt it helped them
develop a greater understanding of the topic.
Mijajlovic, 27

Some ethical considerations I must consider throughout the course of my research and
data collection include school permission, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality,
withdrawal from study, reciprocity, and risk. My principal and assistant principal signed off on
school permission form approving of the research and data collection for my project. All
students, and their parents, have already signed off on a school-wide release form, however I also
inform my students of my research and data collection. Additionally, any data and student work
that is collected, student names are blacked out and replaced with a number; this provides me
with consistent referencing to a student while protecting their identity. I do not intend to share
any of the student work or information outside of colleagues and professors at Northwestern
University and will destroy any work after my research has concluded. Any student who does
not wish to participate in my research and data collection can withdraw, and I will not provide
any rewards or favorable judgment for those students who do choose to participate. And finally I
acknowledge that there is minimal risk involved for the students who do choose to participate;
the risk includes but is not limited to self-consciousness and embarrassment from sharing written
or oral work.
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Over the course of the school year 43 seventh grade students worked on a Math Talk
Frequency Handout (see appendix). The students worked individually, and they worked on the
same handout four times over the course of the year once per quarter. The same multiplication
problem was presented in two ways ( ) on the exact same handout each
time. The students were asked to solve the multiplication problem using as many different
methods as possible.
Mijajlovic, 28

The overall student sample size was 43, however, because of absences and my class
rooms having all levels of students, I analyzed data from the same 20 students each quarter. To
factor in the varying abilities of my students, I used six students from my low-performing group,
eight from my mid-performing group, and six from my high-performing group. These three
different groups were determined from student NWEA RIT Band Skill scores.
According to the Measures of Academic Progress, the NWEA (Northwest Evaluation
Association) is a nonprofit organization that offers a range of Common Core-aligned educational
tests. The test measures a student's growth in math and reading through fall, winter and spring
assessments that are administered on computers. RIT stands for Rasch unit, which is a unit of
measure that uses individual item difficulty values to estimate student achievement. The RIT
scale is used to measure how "tall" a student is on the curriculum scale and scores can be
compared to tell how much growth a student has made, similar to measuring height on a yard-
stick. This score is independent of the age or grade of the student, and reflects the instructional
level at which the student is currently performing. With these data, students were grouped
according to their RIT band score and were placed in one of three groups: below 210, 210-230,
and above 230.
After analyzing the data from Figure 1: Student Growth (Number of Methods Measured
per Quarter) Analysis, among the students (n=20), the mode, most frequently appearing number
of methods used per student was 1 method for quarter one. For quarters two and three, the mode
was 3 methods. For the fourth quarter, the mode increased to 6 different methods.
Additional analysis provided insight into the mean, or average, number of methods
students applied to the problem per quarter and the result are 1) the students averaged 1.30
different methods for the first quarter handout, 2) the students averaged 2.85 different methods
Mijajlovic, 29

for the second quarter handout, 3) the students averaged 4.70 different methods for the third
quarter handout, and 4) the students averaged 6.95 different methods for the fourth quarter
handout. The average number of methods in growth from the first quarter to the fourth was 5.65
number of methods. The number of methods quadrupled over the year, translating to an overall
gain of 434.62%.
Figure 1: Student Growth (Number of Methods Measured per Quarter) Analysis

The overall growth shown by the students was impressive; however I wanted to analyze
the data from the handouts each quarter further to examine student growth more closely. Figure
2: Number of Methods per Quarter -- Box Plot is a graphical representation of the students
development broken up into quartiles. Figure 2 clearly shows the progression of the number of
methods students used per quarter.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1 2 3 4
1.30
2.85
4.70
6.95
1
3 3
6
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

Quarter
Number of Methods Measured per Quarter
n=20
Average Number of Methods Mode (Most frequent number of methods)
Mijajlovic, 30

Figure 2: Number of Methods per Quarter -- Box Plot

An interesting piece of data from Figure 2 is the how spread out the data is for quarter
three and how bunched it becomes at the end of the year in Quarter 4. Essentially, Quarter 3
had a range of one to nine methods with a median, middle number, of four methods, whereas
Quarter 4 had a range of four to ten methods with a median, middle number, of six methods.
However, the most compelling data point was that the top three quartiles from Figure 2,
were above 5.75 methods, whereas in Quarter 2 no students were above 5 methods, and in
Quarter 3, only the top quartile and a very small portion of the second quartile was above 5.75
methods.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 2 3 4
N
u
m
b
e
r

o
f

U
n
i
q
u
e

M
e
t
h
o
d
s

Quarter
Number of Methods Measured per Quarter -- Box Plot
(n=20)
Mijajlovic, 31

This data suggests that the students started to grow and develop an understanding of
different methods and processes throughout the year, and the students were at varying levels for
majority of the school year. Figure 2 clearly shows the number of methods the students use
increases over time, and as the number of methods used increases, the spread also increases
meaning that some students are advancing and picking up on new methods much quicker than
others. However, by Quarter 4, the students start to bunch together again not only did the
number of methods used increase once again in the last quarter, but the gap between the highest
and lowest students closed drastically. Figure 2 shows this consistent increase in the number of
methods over time and puts the overall average gain of 434.62% (average number of methods
from above) in perspective as the lowest performing student has one more method than the
highest performing student at the beginning of the year.
Pen-Pal Letter Writing
During the second quarter of the school year, 17 pairs of students (all levels of
performance), had 10 minutes of class time to write anonymous pen-pal letters to one another for
a span of two months. The pairs of students were randomly selected between two consecutive
periods. The students wrote in their pen-pal journals once a week about the mental math talk
problem (multiplication problem present two ways, such as: ) sharing their
methods of solving, reading their pen-pals responses, and asking any necessary questions.
When analyzing the letter writing, I looked for two components in their entries: 1) written
interaction between the students and 2) the number of different, or unique, methods used.

Mijajlovic, 32

Table 1: Pen-Pal Letter Writing Analysis
Written
Interaction
between Students
Total Number of
Different Methods
Initial Correspondence
Total Number of Methods
Used
Final Correspondence
Total Number of Methods
Used
Class Average 6.3 2.8 5.4
No (n=11) 5.9 2.5 5.1
Yes (n=6) 6.8 3.2 6.2

n=17 (17 pairs, 34 students total)

Written interaction looks like actual letter writing where the students are engaging in
written conversation, asking questions, and responding to their pen-pals questions. Of the 17
journals, only 6 contained written interactions; the other 11 journals contained stand-alone
entries where the student writers did not engage with one another, but simply wrote about what
they were doing themselves.
When looking for the total number of different methods, only unique methods were
counted. For example, if one entry contained the standard multiplication algorithm set up 24 on
top of 36, and then then the other student used the standard algorithm but set it up 36 on top of
24, that counted as one unique method. After analyzing all the entries from the 17 journals, the
average total number of different methods was 6.3. The six pairs of students (n=6) who engaged
one another in written conversation had a slightly higher average with 6.8 unique methods, while
the other 11 pairs of students had a slightly lower average of 5.9 unique methods.
This data suggests that the students who engaged one another in written discourse had
almost one more unique method than their counterparts who did not have any written interaction.
After reading and analyzing the entries, the students who wrote back and forth, were more likely
to try one of their pen-pals methods or asking a question about another method, which in turn
triggered one of the students to use a unique method which was not tried yet.
Mijajlovic, 33

The idea that this engagement would lead to a greater amount of unique methods falls in
line with much of my research. According to Norton and Kastberg (2011), getting more student
engagement through writing is an invaluable benefit. Letter writing provides delayed responses
between the class discussions, the written explanation, and finally followed by a response the
next class period. The delayed response provides students with invaluable time to reflect on both
the task and their peers thinking (Norton & Kastberg, 2012, p. 100).
Additionally, I analyzed the pen-pal entries by comparing the different number of
methods from the first letter to their last letter. For this analysis I looked at the first entry for
both student writers and the last entry for both students, and from then counted the unique
methods in each of those entries.
The first letter for the 17 pairs of students contained an average of 2.8 different methods,
while the last letter contained an average of 5.4 methods. Additionally, the students who
engaged in written communication had a higher first letter average and a higher last letter
average than their counterparts. Over the course of the two months of letter writing, the number
of unique methods students shared almost doubled (see Figure 3: Letter Writing: Number of
Unique Methods).
Mijajlovic, 34

Figure 3: Letter Writing: Number of Unique Methods

This data suggests that when students are given time to write about what they are doing
and read about what other students are doing, they begin to pick up on patterns, develop a
stronger understanding of what they are doing, and refine their own skills as well. Even the
students who did not use the letter writing to engage in written discourse increased the amount of
unique methods. This further supports that the act of writing helps students solidify their own
understanding and pushes their thinking.
Students use writing as an outlet to organize their thoughts and process their learning.
According to Crespo (2003), research has found that writing activities that target audiences other
than the teacher generate a more authentic response and are more appealing to students. Writing
letters to someone outside the classroom who is not the teacher or a classmate creates
opportunities for students to practice and improve their mathematical communication. The
improvement of mathematical communication translates to stronger or higher math fluency.
Initial Correspondence
Total Number of Methods
Used
Final Correspondence
Total Number of Methods
Used
2.8
5.4
2.5
5.1
3.2
6.2
Letter Writing: Number of Unique Methods
(n=17)
Class Average (n=17) No Written Interaction (n=11) Written Interaction (n=6)
Mijajlovic, 35

After analyzing the students pen-pal letters, the data suggests that both student written
interaction and the act of writing, reading, and reflecting lead to an increase in unique methods.
However, the writing activity itself over the course of two months, not the written interaction and
discourse, seemed to have the largest effect on the increase in unique methods used. This idea
goes along with the research which suggests that in order to make sense of the math concepts the
students are using, the student writer must own the math content, manipulate it in a way which
makes sense to them, and then be able to explain it (Pugalee, 1998, p. 21). Writing and problem
solving are intrinsically linked, and the authentic practice the students get through the pen-pal
letter writing directly shows in their more developed math fluency skills in the later letters.
Table White Boards
Upon returning from winter break, the students first started using the table white boards
to share and discuss their methods of multiplication for the days Math Talk. During the first
week of use, I took pictures of the students boards after their time had expired, and then again,
at the end of the school year I took pictures of the students boards after their time had expired.
The pictures of the boards came from the same two classes and the same groups of
students. My classroom had nine pods (or groups) of three or four students per pod. The
students at each pod were grouped by ability, and their ability was based on their NWEA RIT
band score similar to the groupings that were discussed in the Math Talk Frequency Handout
analysis. To quickly reiterate their groupings, according to the Measures of Academic Progress,
the RIT scale is used to measure how "tall" a student is on the curriculum scale and scores can be
compared to tell how much growth a student has made, similar to measuring height on a yard-
stick. This score is independent of the age or grade of the student, and reflects the instructional
level at which the student is currently performing. With this data, students were grouped
Mijajlovic, 36

according to their RIT band score and were placed in one of three groups: below 210, 210-230,
and above 230.
The pictures of each of the nine pods white boards were analyzed for unique methods,
and only unique methods were counted a unique method, as previously discussed in the letter
writing analysis section, is a method that is unlike another students method. For example, if one
student used the standard multiplication algorithm set up 24 on top of 36, and then then the other
student used the standard multiplication algorithm but set it up 36 on top of 24, this slight
variation only counted as one unique method.
The unique methods were tallied from the nine pictures of the boards in January, and then
again were tallied from the nine pictures taken in June. Each picture was of exactly one white
board, and each white board contained work from a pod consisting of three to four students. The
students worked through their various methods with their pod members by showing their work,
discussing their process, and asking questions. The results can be seen in Figure 4: Number of
Methods on White Boards Analysis
Mijajlovic, 37

Figure 4: Number of Methods on White Boards Analysis

The increase in both the average of unique methods and increase in the most occurring
number of methods suggests that the table white board discussions among the students helped
develop an understanding of more processes of multiplication. The students average number of
unique methods increased by 36% and the most occurring number of methods increased by two,
up to five unique methods. Interestingly enough, when the students were surveyed about the
three different activities we did in class, the students preferred the table white boards because
they were able to see a greater variety of methods, share ideas, ask questions, and most
importantly see and hear how their partners solved the problem. The increase in student
understanding through this type of interaction is supported by Vygotskys Social Development
Theory that students learn through their interactions and communications with their peers.
Not only did this discussion with their peers help students develop a deeper
understanding and come up with new methods, but the students were more excited to share new
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
Mean (Average) Mode (Most Occurring)
3.9
3
5.3
5
Number of Methods on White Boards
n=9
January - Unique Methods June - Unique Methods
Mijajlovic, 38

methods and were more willing to experiment with number manipulation in an attempt to come
up with new methods. According to Hutchinson (2010), there is strong evidence and support
defending student conversations and discussions about mathematics which helps solidify student
understanding, builds confidence, encourages participation and reduces math anxiety. Students
naturally want to share their ideas about how they went about solving a problem.
Over several months, I observed students who did not want to share ideas with their peers
or try new methods begin to experiment with other students methods and cross check that
solution with their method of choice and comfort. In addition, I observed students come up with
creative ways of multiplication which I strongly believe to be the result of repetition and
discussion of mental math. One of those methods includes, but is not limited to, a method
creatively named Double Up, Double Down. A student using this method would take a problem
such as and double one of the numbers and cut the other number in half, for example
doubling 36 to 72 and cutting 24 in half to 12, manipulating the problem to . The
student could work with this problem, or do the process again, manipulating the problem to
. The student continues this process until they feel comfortable coming up with a
solution.
Again, I believe this type of experimentation with number manipulation was a result of
repetition and discussion of mental math, and constantly pushing the students to come up with
another method. According to Parrish, the benefits of sharing and discussing computation
strategies are that it clarifies thinking, encourages students to investigate and apply mathematical
relationships, builds a repertoire of efficient strategies, and promotes considering and testing
other strategies (see appendix)

Mijajlovic, 39

End-of-Year Student Reflection
At the end of the school year, I asked students to take an anonymous (their name was
optional) survey about the Math Talks and the three methods of engagement over the course of
the school year. The students were given the following prompt:
Over the course of this school year we have used three different
classroom activities to share our different methods of multiplication the
importance of the process and two minutes of silent mental math has been
consistent throughout the year the other methods of delivery were when you
shared from your tables and I [teacher] was the scribe and wrote your methods
as you articulated them, pen-pal letter writing, and table white board
discussions. Some questions to consider as you answer: Which did you like the
best? Which got you to understand different methods? Which do you think you
learned the most form? Please explain and provide evidence.

There were 43 students (all levels of performance) who were polled. This survey was completed
in a twelve minute time period on Chromebooks using a Google survey. In Table 2: End of Year
Student Reflection Analysis, the first three columns are a summary of the student poll results and
student responses to the survey. The last two columns are my interpretations of their responses.
After reading their reflections and ideas, I grouped them according to topic, I then gave the
topics that I believed was an appropriate one word descriptor, and finally assigned each topic
with positive or negative student attitude.



Mijajlovic, 40

Table 2: End of Year Student Reflection Analysis
Student Survey Choices Trending Student Reflections, Ideas, and Phrases
One Word
Description
Student
Attitude
58%
Table White
Boards (n=25)
Different methods, more variety, interesting ways,
experimenting with new methods, learning new methods,
and sharing ideas
Variety Positive
Sharing and talking about our methods, discussing with our
table partners, showing our group mates, and as students we
like to get into the work and share ideas
Discussion Positive
I got to see and hear how they solved it, I got to ask
questions, it was interesting to see exactly what others did,
and it helped me understand how others think
Process Positive
26%
Pen-pal Letter
Writing (n=11)
Writing to our pen-pal was really exciting and reading what
our pen-pal did was fun
Exciting Positive
My pen-pal never wrote back, my pen-pal always used the
same methods I used, and my pen-pal kept using the same
methods
Monotony Negative
It was hard to understand their work and they never
explained their methods
Unclear Negative
16%
Class Share Out
with Teacher
Scribe (n=7)
Not everyone listened, other students were not paying
attention or did not seem to care, and not everyone was
doing something during this time
Disengaged Negative
I got to see and hear how they solved it and the slow pace
help me see what other students were doing
Clarity Positive
It made me explain clearly what I was doing, I got to share
my methods with the whole class listening, and my name
was put up with my method
Concise Positive

n=43
The first question on the survey was which of the three activities the students preferred.
For this question, the results were largely in favor for the table white boards with 58% (n=25) of
the students, while the other two, pen-pal letter writing and class share out with teacher scribe
were 26% (n=11) and 16% (n=7) respectively. These data point suggests that the students
preferred to work together and work interactively with their group members. According to
Hutchinson (2010), there is strong evidence and support defending student conversations and
discussions about mathematics which helps solidify student understanding, builds confidence,
encourages participation and reduces math anxiety. Students naturally want to share their ideas
about how they went about solving a problem, but they often do not want to share with the entire
class or a large audience. This table discussion provides the students an opportunity to present
Mijajlovic, 41

their ideas and work to a smaller audience, an audience whom the student is also comfortable
with, instilling a level of confidence before presenting and sharing with a larger group. These
checkpoints develop incremental levels of success instilling feelings of confidence in their
mathematical skills.
Even though the results are overwhelmingly positive for the table white boards, the other
two activities, especially the first (class share out with teacher scribe), are critical to the
development of the student success with the table white boards. The teacher scribe activity
provided the scaffolding needed to allow for student creativity and discussion. At the beginning
of the year, the students consistently used methods they were comfortable with (lattice and the
standard multiplication algorithm), however, through daily discussions, pushing students to come
up with numerous ways, and the sharing of new methods, the students started to develop a level
of confidence to experiment and manipulate the numbers in a new way.
In addition to the student preference data point, the student responses were analyzed
through a text analyzer where common ideas were identified. The common ideas and phrases
were then reanalyzed and grouped. Each activity (table white board, pen-pal letter writing, and
class share out with teacher scribe) was comprised of three trends. Once these trending ideas and
phrases were grouped, I assigned a one-word descriptor for that group and determined whether
the trending ideas and phrases were used in a positive or negative manner by the students.
The results of the student responses were also in favor of the table white boards. The
table white boards one word descriptions were: variety, discussion, and process. All three
descriptors were associated with positive attitudes. This data suggests that the students had an
overall positive attitude toward this activity because they were able to see and hear a variety of
different methods their partners used, they were able to interact and get involved in the table
Mijajlovic, 42

discussions, and it provided the students with an inside look into how their peers were solving
the problems. According to Parrish (2011), the benefits of sharing and discussing computation
strategies with peers are that it clarifies thinking, encourages students to investigate and apply
mathematical relationships, builds a repertoire of efficient strategies, and promotes considering
and testing other strategies. This table discussion allowed students to develop confidence in their
mathematical skills while pushing them outside of their comfort zone.
The pen-pal letter writing one word descriptions were: exciting, monotony, and
unclear, and only the first word was positively associated while the next two were associated
with a negative student attitude. This data suggests that even though the students were excited
about the opportunity to write and communicate their mathematical ideas, the lack of actual ideas
generated and the lack of clarity in the written responses inhibited on the potential success of the
activity. This data leads to implications about the letter writing activity. From the student
reflections and responses, the students made it clear that their pen-pals struggled to explain their
mathematical ideas and methods in writing. Crespo (2003) suggests writing can serve as an
effective tool to help students organize their thoughts, and if students can verbalize an
explanation, they will understand it more. Additionally, the journal gives each student an
opportunity to solidify their thoughts through multiple representations. Although many of the
students may have struggled verbalizing and concisely writing an explanation of their
mathematical reasoning behind their process, the process allowed the students to work through
their thoughts and represent their process through some writing. While this process may have
seemed frustrating for the student writers, a base line understanding of writing about
mathematics was developed.
Mijajlovic, 43

Finally, the share out with teacher scribe one word descriptors were: distracted,
clarity, and concise, and only the first word was negatively associated while the next two
were associated with a positive attitude. The data suggests even though some students were not
fully invested into hearing what other students had to share, overall, the ideas and methods
presented were concise and clear, and those who were focused left with a deeper understanding.
According to the Ontario Ministry of Education (2005), mathematical communication is a
critical piece in the process for learning mathematics. Through oral communication, students
reflect upon, clarify, and expand their ideas and understandings of mathematical relationships.
The class share-out pushed students to be clear and concise when explaining their process.
Although some students struggled listening to their peers, this modeling exercise was crucial to
the scaffolding of what would become the table white board discussions.
Data Analysis and Interpretation Summary
After analyzing data from different class activities that all center around mental math and
coming up with new or different methods, each activity added some benefit to student
understanding and development. I believe that if on day one, students were given large white
boards and asked to come up with as many different methods for a single multiplication problem,
student discussion would have been stale and uninventive. From the daily repetition of the
mental math Math Talk along with various student activities following the mental math, the
students started to understand and buy into the importance of the process, being creative, and
trying to develop new methods.
Seeley (2005) suggests that mental math should not depend on rote memorization. In fact,
the development of mental models for numbers and operations is greatly facilitated by students
engaging in purposeful experiences with concrete objects and number patterns. Teachers play a
Mijajlovic, 44

vital role in making sure that these experiences are connected in meaningful ways to the
mathematics we ask students to learn. Each activity had a specific goal in student development
and understanding from the first class share out with the teacher scribe, students were pushed
to communicate their mathematical ideas clearly and explain their reasoning behind different
methods. Followed by the pen-pal letter writing where students were asked to write about their
various methods and explain their thought process, then had to read and reflect upon their pen-
pals responses. And finishing up with the most interactive, and what seemed to be the most
student centered, table white board discussions during these discussions, students explained
what they were doing as they did it, they questioned one another and had to prove their reasoning
correct, and most importantly students were able to test methods in an attempt to develop new
processes to share with the class. According to Phillips & Crespo (1995), this sort of
communication and discussion is an essential part of mathematics instruction, and through this
process of sharing their ideas, students develop, cultivate, and solidify their mathematical
understandings.
Conclusions
Every day I have taught during my career as an educator, I have heard at least one student
answer a question of mine with the following response, Because you have to do it that way.
Students are simply following steps that someone showed them without actually knowing or
understanding what they are doing. My ultimate goal for my students is to understand and
recognize that there are multiple ways to get to an answer, and really push the students to
understand each others methods and be open to new methods of execution. In my classes
Number Talks, renamed daily Math Talks, I present a single multiplication problem horizontally,
written both ways ( ) which reinforces the importance of multiple perspectives.
Mijajlovic, 45

Students see the problem multiple ways to encourage multiple methods of solving. It does not
stop with the daily Math Talks routine; any time an opportunity for mental math comes up in
class, I remind the students to use a Math Talk method to solve mentally first, then use pencil
and paper to confirm. Any time a student provides a solution in class or asks if they are correct, I
reply with the simple statement, Prove it. Students have come to understand that if they ask
me that question, they must defend their answer, reemphasizing the importance of the process.
After an entire year of opening class with mental math multiplication problems and
pushing my students to be creative through their problem solving process I have witnessed
tremendous growth in students of all abilities. Not only is this activity a great class starter, but it
is self-differentiated top students can continue to push themselves to come up with new ways
to manipulate numbers to become quicker and more efficient, while the lower students can really
focus on honing their skills with a few methods that resonate with them. Aside from seeing
firsthand how powerful this activity can be, I plan to continue to incorporate in my classroom in
future years.
One area I must consider is how and when I will implement the various activities after the
two minutes of mental math. This past school year we started with the teacher scribe activity,
then went into letter writing, and then used the table white boards. As previously discussed, I do
not know if the table white boards would have been as successful as they were if it were not for
the other two activities to really push student thinking and scaffold their development. I firmly
believe that if we had started out the year with the table whiteboards the students would not have
developed as many methods and grown as much there needs to be a certain level of modeling
of discussion and problem solving methods.
Mijajlovic, 46

If I were to start the process over, I would have been more mindful about student
groupings and how I collect my data. For example, for the pen-pal letter writing activity, I
would consider pairing students up homogenously by skill level as opposed to the random pairs
which I used. Additionally, when collecting my table white board pictures I would make sure to
keep track of which pictures belonged to certain groups. With these two simple changes I could
have explored and analyzed my data at an even deeper level. This would have allowed to me to
explore growth at the three groupings of students I had in my classrooms students with NWEA
RIT band scores below 210, between 210 and 230, and above 230.
Although I would make slight changes in my data collection methods, next year, I will
continue to do Math Talks with my students, and I intend on giving my students the frequency
handout (see appendix) to see how many different ways they can solve one multiplication
problem. This handout reinforces to students the importance of the process and challenges
students to understand different methods.
The results from this action research are ones that I will share with my colleagues in an
attempt to encourage them to use Math Talks as a starter in their classes as well. Being able to
manipulate numbers in a meaningful and efficient way are skills that our students need to be
successful in school, but more importantly, in their everyday lives. Even though the research
was done in only my classroom, over the course of only one school year, and the data collected
were from only two periods, which means the sample size was limited, there is still a great
conversation to be had based on the results.
Over the course of the year, through experimentation and number manipulation, students
started to develop their own methods of multiplication and started to pick up on discussion
techniques. The students started to present their work using mathematical terminology and
Mijajlovic, 47

defend their process with evidence without being prompted. However, this did not happen after
just one or two times, but after doing this consistently throughout the school year and using the
language with the students consistently, and encouraging them to adopt the language as well. I
see this as an enormous victory a rather simple class starter than developed students
mathematical skills, critical thinking skills, argumentative skills, and further developed their
problem solving skills. The results overwhelmingly suggest that the daily Math Talks fostered
classroom conversations focused on making sense of mathematics.
It is evident that the students learned a great deal from the Math Talks, however, the
students were not the only ones who were pushed outside of their comfort zone and learned
through the process. I learned a great deal about my professional practice, and myself, through
the action research process. Coming into the fall of 2013 I knew I wanted to explore and analyze
the importance of mental math, but I did not know how I was going to go about it. It was not
until the winter of 2014 did I have a narrow enough lens of focus to really start delving into data
and student work that I collected. The process was frustrating I wanted to know at the
beginning what I was going to specifically look at; I wanted answers at the start and I struggled
to find those answers. It took a good amount of research, reading, discussing, and failing to
finally find what I was trying to explore.
This process is an important lesson to have learned and one that I will share with my
students. The idea of grit and perseverance is a critical component of learning a lesson that is
often neglected to be discussed in our everyday classrooms. We often come to a problem A and
quickly expect to come to a solution B; but authentic problems and learning do not work that
way. The real learning occurs through the experimentation and failures which are not often
enough acknowledged and appreciated. The long, meandering path it took me to come to
Mijajlovic, 48

understand my problem and how I was going to go about resolving it was frustrating and
disheartening. However, if it was as simple as having problem A and quickly getting to solution
B, the action research would not have been as meaningful. The struggle to wrap my ideas
around my problem and potential solutions were where the authentic learning and developing
took place. This struggle is what I want all my students to understand that real learning occurs
through attempting, failing, and trying again. That real learning occurs through the process.
That real learning occurs through experimentation. That real learning occurs when you put
yourself out there and become comfortable with being uncomfortable. That real learning does
not come easy. Although my research showed growth in my students and allowed me to explore
student work and student thinking in a way I could never imagine, I believe that the
understanding of what real learning is was the most valuable lesson I learned from this process.











Mijajlovic, 49

References
Burns, M. (2007). Marilyn Burns: Mental Math. Instructor, 116(6), 51-54.
Choppin, J. M., Clancy, C. B., & Koch, S. J. (2012). Developing Formal Procedures through
Sense Making. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 17(9), 552-557.
Crespo, S. M. (2003). Using Math Pen-Pals Letters to Promote Mathematical Communication.
Teaching Children Mathematics, 10(1), 34-39.
Hutchinson, M. J. (2010). When Talking in Class Is a Good Thing: Math Discussions Provide a
Window to Student Understanding. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for
Quick Review, 75(8), 46-48.
Keiser, J. M. (2012). Students' Strategies Can Take Us off Guard. Mathematics Teaching in the
Middle School, 17(7), 418-425.
Knuth, E., & Peressini, D. (2001). Unpacking the Nature of Discourse in Mathematics
Classrooms. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 6(5), 320.
Kostos, K., & Shin, E.-k. (2010). Using Math Journals to Enhance Second Graders'
Communication of Mathematical Thinking. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(3),
223-231. doi: 10.1007/s10643-010-0390-4
May, L. (1995). Mental Mathematics. Teaching Math. Teaching PreK-8, 26(2), 20-21.
Norton, A., & Kastberg, S. (2012). Learning to Pose Cognitively Demanding Tasks through
Letter Writing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15(2), 109-130.
Norton, A., & Rutledge, Z. (2006). Measuring Task Posing Cycles: Mathematical Letter Writing
between Algebra Students and Preservice Teachers. Mathematics Educator, 19(1), 32-45.
Parrish, S. D. (2011a). Number Talks Build Numerical Reasoning. Teaching Children
Mathematics, 18(3), 198-206.
Mijajlovic, 50

Parrish, S. D. (2011b). Number Talks Build Numerical Reasoning. National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics, 18(3), 198-206.
Phillips, E., & Crespo, S. (1995). Math Penpals! Developing Written Communication in
Mathematics.
Pugalee, D. (1998). Promoting Mathematical Learning through Writing. Mathematics in School,
27(1), 20-22.
Rubenstein, R. N. (2001). Mental Mathematics beyond the Middle School: Why? What? How?
The Mathematics Teacher, 94(6), 442-446. doi: 10.2307/20870755
Seeley, C. L. (2005). Do the Math In Your Head! The National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics(December 2005), 3.
Singer, D. (2007). Discourse Time! Developing Argumentative Literacy in the Math Classroom.
Horace, 23(2).
Stein, S., Henningsen, & Silver. (2000). The Mathematical Task Analysis Guide. Mathematics
Teaching in the Middle School: Teachers Collge Press.
Tanner, M. L., & Casados, L. (1998). Promoting and Studying Discussions in Math Classes.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 41(5), 342-350.
Whitin, P., Whitin, D. J., National Council of Teachers of English, U. I. L., & National Council
of Teachers of Mathematics, I. R. V. A. (2000). Math Is Language Too: Talking and
Writing in the Mathematics Classroom.
Williamson, V. (2007). Mental Maths - Passive to Active. Mathematics Teaching Incorporating
Micromath(201), 12-15.
Wills, H. (1993). Writing Is Learning: Strategies for Math, Science, Social Studies, and
Language Arts.
Mijajlovic, 51

Appendices
Math Talk Frequency (Number of Methods) Handout




Mijajlovic, 52


Math Talk Frequency (Number of Methods) Student Work
Student A





Mijajlovic, 53

Student B




Mijajlovic, 54

Student C


Mijajlovic, 55












Mijajlovic, 56

Pen-Pal Letter Writing Example


Mijajlovic, 57



Mijajlovic, 58



Mijajlovic, 59


Mijajlovic, 60


Mijajlovic, 61


Mijajlovic, 62

Student Reflections

Mijajlovic, 63


Mijajlovic, 64


Mijajlovic, 65


Mijajlovic, 66


Mijajlovic, 67



Mijajlovic, 68

Table White Board Pictures

Mijajlovic, 69


Mijajlovic, 70