3.3 StruturesProbResearch - 1008 - Wnotes - v13

Structures of Proportionality
Problems
Krisan Stone, VMP

Leslie Ercole, VMP
Marge Petit, Marge Petit Consulting
(MPC)
Modified October 2008
Original materials created as a part of the Vermont Mathematics Partnership Ongoing Assessment Project (OGAP)
funded by NSF (EHR-0227057) and US DOE (S366A020002)
Structure of Problems Case Study comes first
20 min.
Materials:
Cards sets in envelops
Tab 3
Analyze 6 problems for structures/features of the problems. Sort into 3 categories:

easiest, moderate, and most challenging. Record the features that influence your
decisions.
Discussion: Focus on the features, not on coming to agreement on the sort.
10 min. SG or partners sort the problems and record features

5-10 min. WG Collect features that were identified for each category (chart paper)
**Many of the features you’ve identified have been found to

influence students’ ability to solve problems. 1
MOVE TO SLIDE 2
OGAP Proportionality Framework
Structures of Problems
Mathematical Topics Other Structures

And Contexts
Evidence in Student Work to Inform Instruction
Proportional Transitional Non-proportional Underlying

Strategies Proportional Reasoning Issues, Errors,
Strategies Misconceptions
October 2008 Version 12.0 Vermont Mathematics Partnership (funded by the National Science Foundation EHR-0227057 and the US 2
Department of Education S366A020002)
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
The goal of this session is to explicitly engage participants in the structures of problems that influence
students solving problems involving proportionality. It is founded on research that indicates…
“ Students move back and forth between proportional and non-proportional reasoning and more or less
concrete strategies depending on the structure of the problem and the strength of their proportional
reasoning.” (Cramer, Post, and Currier, 1993; Karplus, Pulos, and Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots,
2006 and 2007)
This slide is divided into four parts – 1) the reference to research; 2) title – OGAP Framework; 3)
Structures of Problems; and 4) Evidence in Student Work. Number 1 appears as the slide is introduced,
the others are inserted as the following is read.
The OGAP Proportionality Framework presents structures in problems involving proportionality and
the strategies that students use to solve problems.
Today we are going to focus on the STRUCTURES section of the framework. From the sorting activity
you identified some of the features/structures that influenced your sorting – Identify those that they
identified.
At this point introduce the participants to the “real” OGAP Proportionality Framework. Give
participants a few minutes to make any observations et al – but don’t spend a lot of time – at this point –
explaining each component as that is the purpose of the PD.
**Explain that the focus of the session today is to familiarize them with the “structures of problems”.
The next full day focuses on understanding the evidence in student work.
2
Structure of the problems
that students solve
Structure refers to –
how the problems are
built
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
When we refer to structures we are referring to --- how the problems are built.
3
Structures of proportionality problems:
• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, and

Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006 and 2006)
• Context (Heller, Post Behr , 1985; Karpus, Polus, and Stage, 1983
• Different types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel, G., Behr, M. 1993)
• The meaning of the quantities in the problem as
defined by the context and the units (Silver, 2006Vermont meeting; VMP
OGAP Pilots, 2006 and 2006)
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
Research indicates and VMP pilots support that there are primarily 5 structures that
influence the strategies students use to solve problems involving proportionality
1) The multiplicative relationship in a problem
2) Context of problem
3) Types of problems
4) The meaning of quantities
5) Complexity of the numbers
**In this session we will be focusing on ---

1) The multiplicative relationship in a problem
2) Context of problem
3) Types of problems
4) Meaning of the quantities
5) Skipping complexity of numbers --pretty obvious
4
Researchers say…
When the multiplicative relationship within or

between ratios is an integer it is easier for
students to solve than when it is a non-integer
(Cramer, Post, and Currier, 1993; Karplus, Polus, and Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006 and 2006)
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
NOTE: In most cases participants have already identified this structure in the
Structures Case Study – not necessarily by stating it in this way – but when they
placed problem number 1 (Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels
of apples. How many boxes will she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?) in the
“Easiest” category. It usually is placed there for two reasons – small numbers – and –
in participant words – “It is easy to see that 8 is 4 x 2.”
5
Carrie is packing apples. It takes 3 boxes to
pack 2 bushels of apples. How many boxes
will she need to pack 8 bushels of apples?
Within a Between
ratio… ratios…
3 boxes x
=
2 bushels 8 bushels
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
The first thing that needs to be established is what is meant by “within” and “between”
ratios. The slide illustrates this idea, BUT we have found that we must continuously
have teachers think and rethink this idea.
In this case the multiplicative relationship “within the ratio (boxes to bushels)” is non-
integral (1.5x), while the multiplicative relationship “between the ratios (4x)” is
integral (4 x).
Background: Some of the literature refers to “within” and “between” measure spaces,
not ratios. For example – “within” bushels as one measure space or “between” boxes
and bushels as two different measure spaces. However, this did not resonate with the
field. We were advised to use “within” and “between” ratios which has resonated with
teachers.
6
Between a
ratios… Within
ratios…
3 boxes 2 bushels
=
x boxes 8 bushels
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
This slide illustrates that the proportion can be set up in multiple forms and can alter
the “within” and “between” relationships.
In this case the multiplicative relationship within the ratios is integral (1.5 x) and
between is non-integral (4 x).
7
Researchers say…
When the multiplicative relationship within and between

ratios are both non-integers then students have more
difficulty AND often revert back to non-proportional
reasoning and strategies. (Cramer, Post, and Currier, 1993; Karplus, Polus, and Stage, 1983; VMP
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
The most difficult situation is when the multiplicative relationship is non-integral both
“within” and “between” the ratios.
8
What is the multiplicative
relationship within and between
the ratios?
Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order

business. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of
apples. How many boxes will she need to pack 7
bushels of apples?
Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)
End of “between” and “within” discussion.
Have participants write the ratios two different ways and then identify the
multiplicative relationship “within” and “between” the ratios.
Multiplicative relationships within and between for this problem.

3 boxes: 2 bushels = x boxes:7 bushels (“within” – non-integral (1.5 x), “between” – 3.5 x)
3 boxes: x boxes = 2 bushels: 7 bushels (“within” – non-integral (3.5 x), “between” – 1.5 x)
9
Multiplicative Relationships VMP Pilot Study (n=153 Seventh grade
students)
• Three similar problems administered across one week period
(Monday (pilot 1), Wednesday (pilot 2), and Friday (pilot 3))
• Main difference between the problems is the multiplicative
relationship “within” and “between” the ratios.
PILOT 1: A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new

playground are proportional to the dimensions of the old playground
40 ft. 120 ft.
80 ft.
What is the length of the new playground?
Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)
TAB 4--Case Study & Samples of Student Work--MULTIPLICATIVE

RELATIONSHIPS CASE STUDY
Background: To study the impact of the multiplicative relationship within and between
ratios the Vermont Mathematics Partnership conducted a pilot study involving 153
seventh grade students. In the pilot study students solved three versions of the same
problem at three different times across one week. The main difference between the three
problems was the nature of the multiplicative relationships “within” and “between” ratios.
Pilot 1:40Aft.school is enlarging its playground.
120 ft. The dimensions of the new playground are
proportional to the dimensions of the old playground. What is the length of the new
playground?
80 ft.
Old Playground New Playground
10
Student Work Analysis (n= 6 students)
Part 1:
• Solve each problem
• Identify the multiplicative relationship within and between
the ratios for each problem
• Anticipate difficulties that students might have when solving
each problem
DISCUSSION
Part 2:
With a partner:
• Identify the multiplicative or additive relationship evidenced
in the student response (e.g., X 3 (between ratios), + 6 (within ratios).
Place your analysis in the cell that corresponds with the
student number and Pilot number in the table (page 3).
• Complete Discussion Questions.
Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)
This activity is divided into two parts and is designed to engage participants in the impact in student
work that results when the multiplicative relationships “within” and “between” ratios is altered.
Part 1 is focused on the problems used in the study. Part 2 is focused on an analysis of student work.
Part 1:
1) Hand out the Case Study to participants
2) Follow the directions on the slide.
3) Before going onto to Part 2, engage in discussion with participants. This is an opportunity to assure
that participants understand what is meant by – “within” and “between” the ratios.
Part 2:
1) Hand out student work sets.
2) Explain that the student work is organized by students and they should be reviewed that way. (e.g.,
review student 1 – pilot 1, then pilot 2, and then pilot 3. Record the data for student 1 as you review
the work. Then go to student 2.)
3) Follow the directions on the Case and the corresponding PP slide.
4) Before reviewing the data from the Vermont Mathematics Partnership pilot study on slide 13,
engage in a discussion with participants relative to discussion questions on the Case and on slide
12.
11
Study Discussion Questions
1) What did you see that you expected?
2) What surprised you?
3) What are the implications for

instruction and assessment?
Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)
Before conducting a group discussion it is recommended that the pairs share their
responses to the questions with the rest of their table.
1) What did you see that you expected?

[Most participants will say that they expected better results with problems 1 then with
problems 2 and 3.]
2) What surprised you?
[Most participants will be surprised by a couple of things. 1) that students can use a
multiplicative strategy for problems 1 and 2, but revert to additive for problem 3;
2) students will stay with a “between” or “within” strategy even when one has an
integral relationship and their choice doesn’t.]
3) What are implications for instruction and assessment?

[This is the most important question. Participants usually get a big “aha’ at this point
(or start t0). That is, they realize that they need to pay attention to assuring that
students have experience solving problems involving proportionality that vary the
multiplicative relationship “within” and “between” ratios. As well as not assume
that if students get an 80% on an assessment focused on proportionality, that they
are proficient without paying close attention to how students handle problems with
varied multiplicative relationships “within” and “between” the ratios.]
12
Study Findings
OGAP 2006 Pilot (n=153)
Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)
The results of the VMP Pilot Study supported findings by other researchers.
13
Structures of proportionality problems:
• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, and

Stage, 1983; VMP OGAP Pilots, 2006 and 2006)
• Context (Heller, Post Behr , 1985; Karpus, Polus, and Stage, 1983)
• Different types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• The meaning of the quantities in the problem as
defined by the context and the units (Silver, 2006Vermont meeting; VMP
• Complexity of the numbers (Harel, G., Behr, M. 1993
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)
PART II
14
Context Matters
• More familiar contexts tend to be easier for
students than unfamiliar contexts (Cramer, K., Post, T., and
Currier, S., 1993)
• How proportionality shows up in different

contexts impacts difficulty (Harel, G., Behr, M. 1993)
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)
The next two slides are designed to call attention to these two points, NOT by
providing examples of all the possible contexts, but by showing three different
contexts and three different ways in which proportionality “shows up” in problems.
Have students take out their OGAP Proportionality Framework. Also, be ready to refer
to the graphs made by participants in the Proportionality Activity.
15
The scale factor relating two similar rectangles is 1.5.
One side of the larger rectangle is 18 inches. How long
is the corresponding side of the smaller rectangle?
Nate’s shower uses 4 gallons of water per

minute. How much water does Nate use
when he takes a 15 minute shower?
A 20-ounce box of Toasty Oats costs $3.00.
Which box costs less per ounce? Explain 1) Which contexts might be
your reasoning. more familiar to
students?
2) How does proportionality
show up in these different
contexts?
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)--FLY THOUGH THIS SLIDE
The most familiar context is Nate’s shower and the least familiar is the scale factor
problem.
Proportionality shows up in three different ways in these problems.

1) Rectangle problem: Using the scale factor to scale down
2) Nate’s shower problem: Application of a unit rate
3) Toasty Oats problem: Rate comparison
16
Different types of problems (Lamon, 1993)
• Ratio
• Rate
• Rate and ratio comparisons
• Missing value
• Scale factor
• Qualitative questions
• Non- proportional
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)
Please take out the OGAP Proportionality Framework. Locate the “Problem Types” on
the framework.
As we review each of these types we will look closely at the structures within the
problems.
17
Ratios and Rates
Ratio – is a comparison of Rate – A rate is a ratio that
any two like quantities compares two quantities
(same unit) measured in different
units and describes how
one unit depends on
another unit.
The ratio of boys to girls is 1:2 $5.00 per hour

The ratio of people with brown $3.00 per pound
eyes to blue eyes is 1:4 25 horses per acre
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)
There is often confusion between the difference between ratio and rates. This slide and
the examples that follow are meant to clarify those difference. The “big idea” is that
ratios are comparisons of like quantities – people to people OR eyes to eyes, while
rates compares two different quantities and describes how one quantity depends upon
the other quantity.
18
Relationships Ratio
• Part: Part OR Part: Whole Problems
Referents OGAP Proportionality Framework
• Implied OR Explicit
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

THINK PAIR SHARE
Refer to the Framework: You will notice two structures related to ratios on the
framework: Ratio Relationships and Ratio Referents.
The relationships in ratios can be part to part OR part to whole. In addition, the
reference to the whole or part may be explicitly stated or implied in the problem.
Let’s look at a couple of examples on this slide and the next slide..
Read the problem. With a partner answer the following questions.
1) Is the relationship a part to part OR a part to whole relationship? [This is a part to
whole – 7th grades boys (part): 7th grade students (whole)]
2) Is the whole explicitly given or implied in the problem and data given? [The whole
is implied. What is given is the two parts – number of girls and number of boys –
not the whole – the 7th grade students.]
As participants are working in pairs walk around the room and listen in on the
conversations. Bring up any important points based on your observations. Briefly
debrief the questions.
19
Relationships
Ratio
• Part: Part OR Part: Whole
Referents
Problem
• Implied OR Explicit
There are red and blue marbles in a bag.

The ratio of red marbles to blue marbles is 1:2.
If there are 10 blue marbles in the bag, how many
red marbles are in the bag?
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

THINK, PAIR, SHARE
Read the problem. With a partner answer the following questions.

1) Is the relationship a part to part OR a part to whole relationship?[This is a part to
part problem – red marbles: blue marbles.]
2) Is the whole explicitly given or implied in the problem and data given? [The parts
are explicitly stated.]
As participants are working in pairs walk around the room and listen in on the
conversations. Bring up any important points based on your observations. Briefly
debrief the questions.
20
Rate Problems What are the meanings of the
quantities in this problem?
What is the meaning of the
answer?
Leslie drove at an average speed of 55 mph

for 4 hours. How far did Leslie drive?
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45) 25 min.

TALK ABOUT ADDITIVE REPRESENTATION 55, 55,…
ASK DANA
As mentioned earlier rates are comparisons of two different quantities where one quantity is
dependent on the other quantity. Rate problems assume you start with two different quantities
and end with an entirely different type of quantity.
For example, this problem provides a rate (speed as defined by miles per hour), the time (in
hours), and asks for a distance (undefined). Instructionally it becomes important for students
to think about the meaning of the quantities, not just the units. One way to help students focus
on the meaning of the quantities is to have students model the situation.
Review the model that represents the situation. Explain how this model illustrates the
meaning of 55 miles per hour. [Note: teachers claim that many students think miles per hour
is one word – milesperhour. This model helps students to understand that miles per hour
means miles per every hour.]
21
Rate comparison problems…
Which box costs less per ounce? Explain What is the general
your reasoning. structure of rate comparison
problems?
Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of

pasture. Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125
acres of pasture.
Which ranch has more acres of pasture per horse?

Explain your answer using words, pictures, or
diagrams.
Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

THINK, PAIR, SHARE
Have participants work in pairs to analyze these two rate comparison problem. [In
general, in rate comparison problems the two quantities that make up the rate are
given, but not the rate to be compared.]
NOTE: Some participants might say that these problems are built to “trick” students
because the order in which the quantities (e.g., horses and acres) are given in the
problem statement is not the same as the rates students are asked to compare (e.g.,
acres per horse). If this occurs, please point out that OGAP questions are designed to
elicit fragile understandings – they are formative, not summative. You want to know if
your students are paying attention to the quantities, so questions are designed to
determine if students are attending to the problem situation.]
22
Meaning of the Quantities Case Study
In Part I of this case study you will analyze 4 student
solutions to Ranch problem. The solutions represent the
kinds of “quantity interpretation” errors that students
make when they solve rate comparison problems. In
pairs, analyze the student solutions and then respond to
the following.
1) What is the evidence that the student may not be
interpreting the meaning of the quantities in the
problem?
2) Suggest some questions you might ask each student
or activities you might do to help them understand
the meaning of the quantities in the problem and the
solution.
Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of
pasture. Jefferson Ranch raises 75 horses on 125
acres of pasture.
Which ranch has more acres of pasture per horse?

Explain your answer using words, pictures, or
diagrams.
Slides 23 & 24 (11:45-12:00)

TAB 5 MEANING OF QUANTITIES CASE STUDY
To explore the importance of placing an instructional focus on “meaning of the

quantities” in problems complete the “Meaning of Quantities” Case Study.
Hand out the Meaning of the Quantities Case Study materials. Use this slide to
introduce Part I of the Case Study.
Provide about 10 – 15 minutes for participants to work in pairs. Then about 10

minutes to debrief the activity focusing on general instructional strategies that arise
from the group. [See Facilitator Notes for an analysis of each of the solutions.]
23
Meaning of the Quantities Case Study – Part II
What evidence in the student solution below of the
student understanding both the meaning of the
quantities in the problem and the solution?
Slides 23 & 24 (11:45-12:00)

TAB 5
Individually and then as a group analyze the student solution in Part II. [See Facilitator
Notes for the Case for an analysis.]
LUNCH
24
Missing value problems
(MVPs) What is the general structure of a
missing value problem?

Slides 25-28 (12:45)

TAKE OUT YOUR OGAP FRAMEWORK
The next Problem Type that we will analyze for structures is missing value problems.
What is the general structure of a missing value problem? [In general, missing value
problems involve finding a missing value in a set of equal ratios. That is, three of the
3 boxes x
four quantities are given and the solution involves finding the fourth quantity.]
=
2 bushels
THESE SHOULD GO QUICKLY.
8 bushels
25
Researchers suggest that the location of the missing value may affect
performance… (Harel, G., Behr, M. 1993)
Internal Structure

business. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples.
How many boxes will she need to pack 7 bushels of
apples?

business. It takes 3 boxes to pack 2 bushels of apples. She
needs 7 bushels of apples packed. How many boxes will
she need?
Slides 25-28 (12:45)
Please refer to the OGAP Framework and find “Internal Structure.” You’ll notice a
reference to Internal Structures. In the Ranch problem many of you noticed that the
quantities were given in one order (acres and horse), but the rate was asked for in a
different order (horses per acre). This is an example of non-parallel structure.
In missing value problems researchers also suggest that the location of the missing
value matters. The implications for instruction and assessment is that the location of
the missing value should be varied in problems that students solve.
Review of problems:
The quantities in both these problems are the same. In both problems the solution is
the number of boxes. However, These two problems are the same except that the
missing values are not in the same place in the problem statement.
In the top problem the structure is parallel (i.e., boxes to bushels throughout).
In the second problem the structure is NOT parallel. The first ratio is given as boxes to
bushels. Then the number of bushels is given. Then students are then asked to
determine the number of boxes. .
26
Change this problem to make it
easier, and then harder.
Slides 25-28 (12:45)
AS A WHOLE GROUP, BRIEFLY DISCUSS HOW to modify this problem to be

easier, harder. Share a few of the problems that participants write.
Things that participants will probably change:

1) the order of the quantities,
2) the magnitude of the numbers, or
3) the multiplicative relationship within and between the ratios.
27
A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new
playground are proportional to the old playground.
A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions
of the new playground are proportional to the
What isdimensions
the measurement of the missing
of the old playground.
length of the new playground? Show your work. Rectangles are not drawn to scale
Old Playground New Playground
90ft 110 ft.

.
630 ft.
What is the measurement of the missing length of the

new playground? Explain how you found your What type of problem is
answer.
this similarity problem?
Slides 25-28 (12:45)
Similarity problems show up as missing value problems, ratio comparison problems

(See slide 29), and scale factor problems (see slide 30).
This is a missing value problems.
28
What type of problem is
this similarity problem?
The dimension of 4 rectangles are given below.

Which two rectangles are similar?
A)2” x 8”
B) 4” x 10”
C) 6” x 12”
D)6” x 15”
Slides (29-31) 12:45
GIVE TIME TO THINK ABOUT STRATEGIES. SPEND TIME ON THIS SLIDE.

This is a ratio comparison problem. It can be solved by comparing the ratios between
the two dimensions or by finding the multiplicative relationship between the
dimensions.
2 DIFFERENT STRATEGIES (1) WITHIN THE FIGURE OR (2) BETWEEN THE
FIGURES
Ratio comparison solution (B and D because the ratio of one length to the other is the
same (2:5))
A) 1:4
B) 2: 5
C) 1:2
D) 2: 5
Multiplicative relationship between dimensions (B and D because the multiplicative

relationship with both ratios is 2.5)
A) 8” is 4 times 2”
B) 10” is 2.5 times 4”
29
C) 12” is 2 times 6”
D) 15” is 2.5 times 6”
Scale Factor What is the general structure of
Problems scale factor problems?

Slides (29-31) 12:45

GO FAST
The examples illustrate two different structures for scale factor problems.
John Hancock Center Problem: The height of the model and the original are given.
The problem asks for scale factor.
Rectangle: The scale factor is given with length of the larger rectangle. The problem
asks for the length of smaller rectangle
30
Scale
Factor
If a student was unable to solve this

problem successfully, what variables
would you change to make it more
accessible? Why?
Slides (29-31) 12:45
In pairs, participants modify this problem.
Ways to modify problem:

1) Change scale factor to an integer
2) Give dimension of smaller rectangle and ask to scale-up instead of scaling down
31
Researchers indicate that students
should interact with qualitative
predictive and comparison questions
as they are developing their
proportional reasoning…. (Lamon, S. (1993))
Slides 32 & 33 (12-45-12:50)
32
Qualitative Why do you think researchers
suggest these as important stepping
Problems stones?
Kim ran more laps than

Bob. Kim ran her laps in
less time than Bob ran
his laps. Who ran faster?
If Kim ran fewer laps in more time than

she did yesterday, would her running
speed be: A) faster; B) slower; C)
exactly the same; D) not enough
information.
Slides 32 & 33 (12-45-12:50)
These are non-numerical problems that involve a proportional situation. These help
students think about the relationships, and not take cues from numbers.
33
Researchers say…
Students need to see examples of proportional
and non-proportional situations so they can
determine when it is appropriate to use a
multiplicative solution strategy. (Cramer, Post,
and Currier, 1993)
Slides 34-39 (12:45-12:55)
Slide 38--NON-PROPORTIONAL STUDENT WORK-SORTING TASK
34
Solve these problems
(Cramer, K., Post, T., and Currier, S. (1993)
Sue and Julie were running 3 U.S. dollars can be

equally fast around a exchanged for 2 British
track. Sue started first. pounds. How many
When she had run 9 laps, pounds for $21 U.S.
Julie had run 3 laps. dollars?
When Julie completed 15
laps, how many laps had
Sue run?
Slides 34-39 (12:45-12:55)
Slide 38
TAB 6--NON-PROPORTIONAL STUDENT WORK-SORTING TASK
These two problems were given to a group of pre-service teachers.

[If participants have not already solved Sue or Julie (or a problem like it) then have
participants solve both these problems. Then review solutions. It has been our
experience that many teachers will apply a proportional strategy to the additive
situation in the Sue and Julie problem. This is consistent with what happened with the
group of pre-service teachers. See the next slide.]
35
Classic Non-proportional Example
(Cramer, Post, and Currier cited in Research Ideas, 1993)
“Sue and Julie were running equally fast around a track.

Sue Started first. When she had run 9 laps, Julie had
run 3 laps. When Julie completed 15 laps, how many
laps had Sue run?”
22/33 undergraduates student treated

this as a proportional relationship.
Slides 34-39 (12:45-12:55)
[Slide 38--NON-PROPORTIONAL STUDENT WORK-SORTING TASK]
36
Proportional example…
Three U.S. dollars can be exchanged for 2
British pounds. How many pounds for 21 U.S.
dollars?
Same group – 100% solved it correctly using

traditional proportional algorithm
No one in the same group could explain why

this is a proportional relationship while the
“running laps” is not.
Slides 34-39 (12:45-12:55)
37
Vermont
Version
Kim and Bob were running equally

fast around a track. Kim started
first. When she had run 9 laps, Bob
had run 3 laps. When Bob
completed 15 laps, how many laps
had Kim run?
Do student work sort!
Slides 34-39 (12:45-12:55)
TAB 6--NON-PROPORTIONAL TASK SORT
To determine if middle school students treated this additive situation as a proportional

situation, the VMP OGAP conducted a small study involving 82 sixth grade students.
Some of the students had had instruction in solving proportional problems and others
did not have instruction prior to solving the problem.
Handout the Non-Proportional Student work set of papers. To get a feel for the type of
responses found in the study (with a partner) sort this student work into 2 piles – 1)
treated the problem as a proportion problem; 2) Treated as an additive problem.
What did you find?
38
Kim and Bob were running
equally fast around a track.
Kim started first. When she
had run 9 laps, Bob had run 3 Vermont Version
laps. When Bob completed 15
laps, how many laps had Kim Grade 6(n= 82)
run?
• 39/82 (48%) solved as a proportion

• 33/82 (40%) solved reflecting the
additive situation
• 10/82 (12%) non-starters
What are the instructional implications?
12:55
These are the data from the study. What are the instructional implications of these
data? Have participants discuss in pairs for a minute or two and then as a full group.
[Usually the discussion starts with the realization that the results might be an artifact
of instruction. That is, most mathematics programs/texts ONLY include proportional
problems during units focused on proportions. Students may use the structure of 3
known quantities and one unknown quantity and assume it is a proportional situation.
From there participants recognize the importance of embedding non-proportional
problems in instruction and assessment so students have to discriminate between the
situations.]
39
Topics Different problem types are embedded in the
• Ratios and different mathematical topics
proportions …within different contexts
• Percents …which involve different multiplicative
• Scaling relationships
• Similarity
…where the meaning of quantities within the
• Linear equations
problem and answer can vary
• Linear patterns and
relationships ... And by the way, the numbers used (integer
• Slope vs. non-integer) also affect performance.
• Rates
• Frequency
distributions Wow! No wonder
• Probability proportions are
tough to teach and
learn.
Slide 40-41 (12:55)

The focus here should also be on the instructional implications assuring that students
interact with a variety of structures in both instruction and assessment.
40
….A proportional reasoner should be able to
• recognize the nature of the proportional relationship,
• find a sensible and efficient method to solve problems
given the context, problem type, complexity of the
numbers, meaning of the quantities, and the number
relationships.
•Represent the quantities in the solution with units that
reflect the meaning of the quantities consistent with the
problem situation.
Ultimately, a proportional reasoner should not be influenced by

context, problem types, the quantities in the problems and their
associated units, or numerical complexity. (Cramer., Post, Currier, 1993;
Silver, Ed VT cite visit (2006)
12:55
41
Pre-assessment Analysis
• Problem types
• Context
• Multiplicative Relationships
• Internal Structure
• Ratio – relationship and referents (if
applicable)
Slide 42 12:55-1:45 (40 min.)

TAB 7 PRE-ASSESSMENTS
Hand out the OGAP Framework and grade level pre-assessments. Regroup
participants into grade level groups (if this makes sense this late in the workshop).
Have participants analyze each of the problems for 1) problem types;2) Context; 3)
multiplicative relationships within and between ratios; 4) Internal structures; and, 5)
ratio relationships and referents
42
Administering the OGAP Pre-assessment
• Tips for Students
• Time
• Level of Teacher Assistance
• Analysis before December Meeting - NONE

[IMPORTANT: Teachers should select 1 classroom of students to pre-assess for the December meeting.]
Thoughts on Administering the OGAP Proportionality Pre-Assessment

An important component of the Vermont Mathematics Partnership’s Ongoing Assessment Project involves
gathering information about student understanding of proportionality concepts before beginning instruction through
the administration of a pre-assessment. This pre-assessment is designed to elicit developing understandings, pre-
conceptions, misconceptions, strategies that student use, and common errors that students make when solving
questions involving proportionality. It is in this spirit of formative assessment that we offer the following thoughts
on administering the pre-assessment.
Tips for Students
Let the students know that this is a pre-assessment on material that they will be learning this year so some or all of
the material may be new to them. Encourage them to try their best even if they are unsure. Remind them that the
information will help you in your planning, and will not be used as a grade.
Time
The amount of time students need to complete the pre-assessment will differ depending on the grade level and the
number of items in your pre-assessment. The pre-assessment can be administered in numerous ways. Some
teachers choose to spread the assessment over several days while others administer the entire assessment in one
class period. Again, the purpose is to collect evidence from your students so feel free to choose a schedule that
works best for your students.
Level of Teacher Assistance
The purpose of formative assessment is to collect evidence that will help you best meet the needs of your students.
With this in mind, feel free to read any items to students who you feel need this type of accommodation. You may
also decide to scribe for students who require assistance with writing. Although no special materials are needed to
complete the pre-assessment, students can use tools or manipulatives that are part of regular classroom instruction.
By all means assist students in decoding non-mathematical vocabulary. You should not, however, help students
interpret any mathematics content.
Final Thoughts
The ideas above are not intended to be used as a “checklist of do’s and don’ts” but rather as a way to communicate
the spirit in which the pre-assessments are best administered to your students. Please bring the completed pre-
assessments to the December session. A major goal of these sessions is to help you learn how to analyze the
evidence in your students’ responses and use your findings to influence your upcoming proportionality instruction.
Feel free to contact Marge Petit (mpetit@gmavt.net) if you have any questions.
43

3.3 StruturesProbResearch - 1008 - Wnotes - v13

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3.3 StruturesProbResearch - 1008 - Wnotes - v13

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structures of Proportionality

Krisan Stone, VMP

Modified October 2008

Structure of Problems Case Study comes first

Analyze 6 problems for structures/features of the problems. Sort into 3 categories:

Discussion: Focus on the features, not on coming to agreement on the sort.

10 min. SG or partners sort the problems and record features

**Many of the features you’ve identified have been found to

Mathematical Topics Other Structures

Evidence in Student Work to Inform Instruction

Proportional Transitional Non-proportional Underlying

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, and

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

**In this session we will be focusing on ---

5) Skipping complexity of numbers --pretty obvious

When the multiplicative relationship within or

OGAP Proportionality Framework

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

When the multiplicative relationship within and between

OGAP Proportionality Framework

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

Carrie is packing apples for an orchard’s mail order

Slides 2-9 (10:30-10:55)

End of “between” and “within” discussion.

Multiplicative relationships within and between for this problem.

PILOT 1: A school is enlarging its playground. The dimensions of the new

40 ft. 120 ft.

What is the length of the new playground?

Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)

TAB 4--Case Study & Samples of Student Work--MULTIPLICATIVE

Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)

2) What surprised you?

3) What are the implications for

Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)

1) What did you see that you expected?

3) What are implications for instruction and assessment?

Slide 10-13 (10:55-11:20)

• Multiplicative relationships in a problem (Karplus, Polus, and

• Complexity of the numbers (Harel, G., Behr, M. 1993

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

• How proportionality shows up in different

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

Nate’s shower uses 4 gallons of water per

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)--FLY THOUGH THIS SLIDE

Proportionality shows up in three different ways in these problems.

OGAP Proportionality Framework

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

The ratio of boys to girls is 1:2 $5.00 per hour

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

There are red and blue marbles in a bag.

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)

Read the problem. With a partner answer the following questions.

Leslie drove at an average speed of 55 mph

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45) 25 min.

Big Horn Ranch raises 100 horses on 150 acres of

Which ranch has more acres of pasture per horse?

Slides 14-22 (11:20-11:45)