Students' Understanding of Volume and How It Affects Their Problem Solving

Students Understanding of Volume and How it Aects Their Problem Solving
A Classroom Research Project submitted to The Master of Arts in Teaching Program of Bard College by David Price
Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 24, 2012
Contents
1 Introduction, Question, and Purpose 2 School and Classroom Context 3 Literature Summary
3 5 7
4 Description of Method 11 4.1 Outline of surface area and volume unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2 Pre-assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.3 Clinical interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5 Analysis and Findings 5.1 Pre-assessment analysis 5.2 Case study: Travis . . . 5.3 Case study: Nadia . . . 5.4 Case study: Yolanda . . 5.5 Case study: Ryan . . . . 5.6 Case study: Isabella . . 5.7 Case study: Martha . . 15 15 21 24 27 30 33 37 40 44 45
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
6 Reection and Implications Bibliography Appendix
List of Figures
5.2.1 Traviss response to Question 9 on the pre-assessment. . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 Nadias work on the last question in our interview. . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5.1 Ryans work on the last question in our interview. . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6.1 Isabellas pre-assessment denitions of area, surface area, and volume. 5.6.2 Isabellas solution to Problem 8 on the pre-assessment. . . . . . . . . 5.7.1 Marthas solution to Problem 2 on the pre-assessment. . . . . . . . . 5.7.2 Marthas denition of surface area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7.3 Marthas answer to Question 9 on the pre-assessment. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
22 26 33 34 34 37 38 39
1
Introduction, Question, and Purpose
This project is centered on my students understanding of surface area and volume, specifically in the context of problems similar to those on the New York State Regents Examination in Geometry. I wanted to see what my students conceptual understandings of surface area and volume were and then explore how their conceptual understandings correlated with their use of traditional formulas for nding those quantities for various solids such as prisms and cylinders. This led to the following guiding question for my research: how are my students understandings of volume and surface area tied to the methods they use to grapple with Regents Geometry problems on those topics? I was attracted to this line of questioning when my students had diculty keeping straight the formulas for area and circumference of a circle in a previous unit; this led to a discussion of the notion of area and how the concepts of area and perimeter are reected in the formulas that students must memorize. The surface area and volume formulas required of students on the Regents examination are only more numerous and dicult to apply (even with a reference sheet), and thus I wanted to learn more about the thought
1. INTRODUCTION, QUESTION, AND PURPOSE
processes of my students when they were deciding which formula to use and deciding between nding surface area and nding volume. One major sub-question in this project is how my students understand and reconcile two notions of volume. The rst is that of packing; this notion is highlighted in questions on rectangular prisms and questions involving the number of unit cubes that can t into a shape. It is connected to an understanding of dimension; a segment has length, a square has area, and a cube has volume. The second notion of volume is that of lling; this idea is apparent when students are asked to verify empirically the volume of a cone or pyramid. Of course these two understandings are of the same quantity, but I wanted to investigate how my students grasp of these two dierent notions did or did not aect their ability to solve traditional volume problems. Another important factor I found myself investigating was how students grab context clues from problems to help themselves decide whether to calculate surface area or volume. For example, students with a grasp of the three-dimensional nature of volume were often quick to gure out that it was necessary to nd volume in a problem which mentioned cubic feet. Perhaps more interesting were some of the incorrect ways in which students brought their prior knowledge of surface area and volume (both abstract and applied) to bear on problems they were solving for the rst time.
2
School and Classroom Context
This research project took place with students from the three sections of Geometry taught at the Bronx Academy of Letters. Eective class size ranged from approximately twelve students in the smallest section to approximately 25 students in the largest and bestattended section. Most students were in the tenth grade, although a handful were in ninth, eleventh, or twelfth. When this project was conducted, approximately 40 out of 65 students were registered to take the New York State Regents High School Examination in Geometry in June 2012. Student desks were gathered in groups of three or four, although some students made the choice or had been asked to sit and work independently during class time. The school-wide grading system at BAL is based on learning targets rather than traditional grades. Students grades are calculated completely on whether or not they have achieved mastery on particular targets. For the geometry students studied here, mastery was assessed in the form of a weekly or biweekly period-long written assessment which included up to ten learning targets from the current semester. On each target, students received mastery (full credit), approaching mastery (no credit), or remote
2. SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT
mastery (no credit). A students grade on a given target was his or her mastery level as of the last time assessed; this was in the interest of reecting long-term retention and deemphasizing how long it took a student to master a given target. Geometry students in my placement had one of four goals for the class: achieve a score or 85 or more on the Regents exam, 75 or more, 65 or more, or simply pass the class. Each students goal was determined by their prior performance and an individual conversation between my mentor teacher and the student. Students taking the Regents took a more dicult version of each Learning Target Assessment. The total number of targets out of which a student was graded was also determined by their goal for the class. For example, when there were 18 targets total at one point in the semester, the 85+ group was graded out of 16 targets and the 75+ group was graded out of 11 targets. The Bronx Academy of Letters consists of a high school and a middle school. The high school has an enrollment of approximately 330 students, drawing the vast majority of its student body from the surrounding neighborhoods in the South Bronx. Approximately 85% of the student population is eligible for free or reduced lunch, the four-year graduation rate is 83% (with that gure rising to 94% for six years), and 19% of the student body is deemed college-ready by the New York City Department of Education. 10% of the school is classied as ELL and 21% as Special Education; these students are integrated into the classes studied. The student body is 34% Black or African-American, 65% Hispanic or Latino, and 1% Asian or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacic Islander. All demographic data is from [9].
3
Literature Summary
Childrens conceptions of volume and three-dimensional space have been studied extensively. In [11], Piaget and Inhelder describe the diculty of genuine two- and threedimensional thinking: Hence the systematic diculty found by children at earlier levels when trying to relate areas and volumes with linear quantities. The child thinks of the area as a space bounded by a line which is why he cannot understand how lines produce areas. We know that the area of a square is given by the length of its sides, but such a statement is intelligible only if it is understood that the area itself is reducible to lines, because a two-dimensional continuum amounts to an uninterrupted matrix of one-dimensional continua (350).
In other words, a deep understanding is dicult to achieve since it requires a huge leap in the understanding of multiplication, from repeated addition of discrete quantities to a continuous operation. This same phenomena is at work when children experience diculty understanding and working with volume. Indeed a rigorous treatment of area and volume (i.e. measure theory) is signicantly more dicult than the computation generally required of high schoolers when solving volume problems. As put in [8], developing measurement sense is more complex than learning the skills or procedures for determining a measure. . . however, classroom instruction is mainly focused on memorizing the formulas
3. LITERATURE SUMMARY
to solve problems requiring low level of cognitive demand (62). Volume and surface area are two topics for which developing a rigorous and robust concept of the ideas in play is signicantly harder than any of the mathematical operations required to solve many related problems. Furthermore, dierent notions of volume and analogies used to describe volume serve to color individuals understandings of volume, as well as their ability to parse and solve dierent volume problems. The primary distinction made in the literature (e.g. [2, 3, 5]) is that of volume (packing) versus volume (lling), terminology used in [3] and throughout this paper. The notion of volume (packing) is related to the analogy of cubes; the number of unit cubes which can t inside a three-dimensional object is a measure of that objects volume. Volume (lling), on the other hand, is a notion of volume as measured by a uid; to nd the volume of a shape, ll it with water and measure the volume of the water in another container. The notion of volume (packing) is inherently three-dimensional, while volume (lling) is more linear; indeed, in [3], it is claimed that an understanding of area is a prerequisite for an understanding of volume (packing), while only an understanding of length is required to acquire a notion of volume (lling). This distinction is further supported in [5], in which it is shown that students arrive at a concept of volume (lling) only with strong three-dimensional visualization skills, while such ability is less necessary when volume is taught in terms of lling or capacity. In short, while both concepts of volume are of course accurate, they are arrived at in very dierent ways, require dierent sets of prerequisite skills, and thus stand to aect how students solve volume problems. Another issue encountered when teaching and learning about volume and surface area is the gap between concrete and abstract understandings of volume. In [7] it is noted that, especially with volume and other physical quantities, because students have experienced and thought about the world, they do come to class with ideas, often ill-formed, hazy, and inappropriate, but ideas nevertheless (742). This means that a unit on volume must aim
to help clarify, extend, and abstract the prior knowledge of students, something that may be particularly dicult when teaching a topic that can range from the very concrete to the very abstract. In [1], Battista argues that the rst level of geometric thinking consists of interacting with concrete objects in isolated episodes, in which students identify and operate on shapes and other geometric congurations as visual wholes; they do not explicitly attend to geometric properties or to traits that are characteristic of the class of gures represented (88). For a student at this level of thinking, volume may indeed still seem only a confusing list of unrelated formulas with no theoretical unifying idea tying them together. This transition from the concrete and specic to the abstract and general is always a dicult jump in mathematical thinking; according to Piaget in [10], the diculty of understanding spatial concepts lies in this jump, and the problem is in fact none other than that of the physical and experimental nature of mathematics as opposed to its being of an a priori and purely intellectual character (380). This leaves last the issue of how to access students understandings of volume, since one of the diculties many students experience is precisely that their personal concept of volume is somehow awed and is the driving force behind their incorrect answers to problems. Clinical interviews are one type of tool that can be used to access these understandings, since, according to [6], the interviewer makes every eort to be child-centeredto see the issues from the childs point of view (113). This sort of low-stakes and investigative conversation allows the interviewer to discover more about a childs thinking than is possible in a traditional classroom setting. At the same time, interviews can inform teaching, since good teaching. . . sometimes involves the same activities as those comprising formative assessment: understanding the mathematics, the trajectories, the childs mind, the obstacles, and using general principles of instruction to inform the teaching of a child or group of children ([6], 126). By using interviews to get at student ideas (as opposed to mere
10
answers), it is possible to understand more deeply the source of their misunderstandings about volume and other mathematical concepts.
4
Description of Method
4.1 Outline of surface area and volume unit

The eld component of this project took place from May 9 to May 18, 2012. Starting with a pre-assessment task on area, surface area, and volume, the data collection consisted primarily of work collected from the pre-assessment and clinical interviews conducted with students, most of whom attended oce hours mandatory for those signed up for the Regents Examination (approximately three fourths of the students fall into this category). Students were selected for interviews based on availability and output produced on the pre-assessment. The following is a timeline of the unit and data collection for this project. More detailed lesson plans and tasks for the days which pertain to this project can be found in the appendix. Day 1: Students were given 25 minutes to work on a pre-assessment task involving area, surface area, and volume. Questions included those asking for students own words denition of surface area and volume, as well as traditional volume problems, and problems asking students to determine what quantity was being asked for in a particular word problem. See the appendix for a copy of the pre-assessment.
4. DESCRIPTION OF METHOD
12
Day 2: Objective: To discover the properties of rectangular prisms and investigate their volumes. Students began to work through a task involving the volume of rectangular prisms. In addition to more traditional volume and surface area questions, students also investigated the surface area to volume ratios of their prisms and collected data from their classmates. A copy of the lesson plan and task for this day is included in the appendix. Day 3: Objective: To strengthen student knowledge of rectangular prisms volume and surface area. Students continued the task of the previous day and solved more traditional rectangular prism problems. Day 4: Objective: To extend student knowledge of rectangular prisms to non-rectangular prisms. Students investigated and solved problems involving the surface area and volume of triangular prisms, framed by the following questions: How can we use our knowledge of rectangular prisms on other prisms? What still works and what doesnt? Day 5: [Continuation of previous days work.] Day 6: First Learning Target Assessment to include volume and surface area. In addition to six targets from earlier units, three targets were included on volume and surface area. A copy of these targets and test questions can be found in the appendix. 20: I can dene volume and surface area and recognize them in context. 21: I can nd the volume of basic prisms and use it to solve problems. 22: I can nd the surface area of basic prisms and use it to solve problems. Two clinical interviews (Travis and Yolanda) were conducted on this day.
13
Day 7: Objective: To investigate the volume and surface area of cylinders; to solve problems involving these quantities. Students investigated the volume of cylinders by nding the volume of beakers and graduated cylinders. They also investigated the lateral area of cylinders by measuring canned goods and their labels. One interview (Nadia) was conducted. A copy of the plan and task can be found in the appendix. Day 8: Most students absent on eld trip. With students who were present, continuation of cylinders and comparison to cones. Three interviews (Ryan, Isabella, Martha) were conducted. Day 9: Continuation of cones (beyond the scope of this project). Day 10: Volume of cones and pyramids (beyond the scope of this project, end of unit). Day 11: Second Learning Target Assessment of volume and surface area unit. Two new learning targets: 23: I can nd and apply facts about the volume of cylinders, cones, and pyramids. 24: I can nd and apply facts about the lateral area of cylinders and cones.
4.2 Pre-assessment
All of my geometry students who were present on May 9 were given a 25 minute preassessment to help me gauge their prior knowledge concerning area and volume. The pre-assessment consisted of a question each about the surface area and volume of a rectangular prism, questions asking for students notions of area, surface area, and volume, two questions involving nets which folded into three-dimensional shapes, two Regents geometry questions on volume (with the formula provided for one and not the other), a question asking how to nd the volume of an irregular shape, and questions which asked students whether nding surface area or volume was more appropriate in a certain context.
14
Students were allowed calculators but no Regents examination formula sheets. A copy of the pre-assessment can be found in the appendix.
4.3 Clinical interviews

Over the course of the unit, I interviewed six students during various free times in the school day. Due to the fact that this unit culminated on the last day of my student teaching placement, I was unable to wait until after the unit to interview any students. I attempted to order my interviews by the individual Regents/non-Regents goals of the students selected. This gave me a rough idea of who I could interview earlier in the unit; earlier interviews are with students from the higher brackets, and so on. Each students goal is included in the analysis of their interview. This ordering of interviews was only approximate for logistical reasons and thus the day of each student interview is included to put their answers in the context of the unit. When selecting students, I considered their work on the pre-assessment, the types of questions they asked in class, and their willingness to help me with my project. An outline of the interview questions and the sheets shown to the students interviewed can be found in the appendix. While the format of every interview diered, they each followed the same basic structure and all included the slightly modied Regents examination questions. According to [4], it is crucial during such interviews to not include questions that are outside the realm of what the respondent can answer (103) and thus interviews with students with weaker computational skills were often shorter. In addition to this, these students often had the most interesting conceptual ideas of surface area and volume, and so a larger portion of their interviews is centered on their conceptual understandings.
5
Analysis and Findings
5.1 Pre-assessment analysis

The rst two pre-assessment questions which are analyzed in this project asked students to nd the volume (Q2) and surface area (Q3) a rectangular prism measuring 5 inches by 7 inches by 4 inches, phrased in terms of one inch cubes and wrapping paper, respectively. Counting a numerically correct answer with incorrect units as correct, 26 out of 52 students found the volume of the rectangular prism correctly and none found the surface area (most papers being left blank on that question). The next questions asked for students denitions of area, surface area, and volume; their responses are included in Table 1, with a blank space denoting a blank answer and brackets denoting descriptions of a drawing or a formula. Notable patterns included several students whose concepts of area and volume were tied to that of rectangles and rectangular prisms, respectively. A notable trend in the denitions of surface area was comparison to the concept of perimeter. Several students also used the word mass in their denition of volume.
5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
16
The next two questions (Q7 and Q8) on the pre-assessment that are analyzed here were Regents Geometry exam questions. The rst asked for the volume of a triangular prism (with no formula provided) and the second asked for the volume of a square pyramid (with a formula provided). There were no correct answers to the rst of these questions; however, ten students got twice the correct answer, presumably multiplying the length, width, and height they saw labeled in the picture. Four students correctly answered the second of these questions; many students who answered incorrectly used one of the dimensions of the base instead of the area of the base when using the formula. The next question (Q9) asked for methods to nd the volume of an irregular shape. Most students left this question blank. The answers students gave fell into three rough categories. An A in the table denotes an answer suggesting an understanding of the additivity of volume. All of these students identied three components of the shape and correctly claimed in some form that it was sucient to nd the volume of each component and add ones answers to nd the volume of the entire shape. An M in the table denotes an answer involving the need to know the measurements of the shape before proceeding to nd the volume; these answers mostly included some version of you have to nd the length, width, and height, suggesting a connection in these students minds between the general concept of volume and the formula for the volume of a rectangular prism. An F in the table denotes an answer involving lling the shape with liquid (the shape was referred to as a cup in the assessment). The last question (Q10) asked students to decide whether it was more appropriate to nd surface area, volume, or neither in certain contexts (e.g. how much soup in a can?). In Table 1, students are scored out of seven. Several questions have multiple justiable answers; the score of any student with a reasonable justication for an incorrect answer is marked with an asterisk. Any answer of which I could not make sense is marked with a question mark.
17
I found that my students did not do nearly as well on the pre-assessment as I had predicted. For example, I had expected that at least some students would correctly compute the surface area of a rectangular prism and the volume of a triangular prism, but no students did. With this in mind, there were several ways in which I found myself reevaluating the needs of my students as a group as we went into the surface area and volume unit. First, as I had been warned by my mentor teacher, my students struggled to translate mentally between three-dimensional objects, two-dimensional pictures of solids, two-dimensional nets which folded into three-dimensional objects, and verbal descriptions of three-dimensional objects. This led me to build in more hands-on activities with solids than I had previously planned and spend more time during debriefs and mini-lessons discussing the visualization of three-dimensional objects. Second, many of my students seemed to confuse volume and surface area, two denitions which I then tried to reinforce over the course of the unit with multiple explanations and analogies. Third, my students grasp of dimension was often shaky. For example, many students would multiply only two lengths to nd the volume of an object, an operation which would be dissonant to a student who understood in a deeper way the invariantly three-dimensional nature of volume and how units in dierent dimensions relate to each other. This led me to focus on units and dimension more than previously planned, albeit in small ways in the course of an activity or mini-lesson.
Table 1: Student pre-assessment data Student KEY 1 2 3 4 5 90 12 35 140 Q2 140 Area

Various inside of a shape [circumference of circle formula] something inside a shape F Perimeter added or multiplied all up measurement of whats inside the object [SA of sphere formula] [Volume of Sphere formula] The volume of something everything inside base x height measurements of the how much space in whole object and all inside the object the sides not just the perimeter
Surface Area
Various
Volume
Various
Q7 140
Q8 1830.3
Q9 N/A
Q10 N/A
70 28 1830.3 40 289
2*
2 ?
140
157
107.6
7 (Travis)
19600
The amount inside a The distance around The mass of a figure 78400* figure a figure ? Outside/around the perimeter is the surface area [drawing of cylinder]
96.33
A M
3 2
8 16 inches (Martha) of cubes 9
116 inch measurement of a cubes shape

amount of square
The inside
The measurement of How much the shape the front of a shape can hold Mass of a figure
4*
10 (Ryan) 34 boxes units on the inside of 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19600* 140 ft 140 140 140 700
Base multiplied by height The amount of space the figure LxW area is the side of a square or triangle SA=lw*lh*wh [picture of circle] LxwxH V=LxWxH
4 280 70 x 4 280
The amount of space inside What's outside How much something can contain [formula for volume of pyramid] The amount of space inside
95.37 ? 96.3
3 2
The amount of space The amount of space inside a shape or outside a shape or figure figure The amount of space outside What's inside
280 28 M
3 2 6
12.566 in any [?]
18 19 (Isabella) 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 (Yolanda) 30 31 32
140 140
The placement around the box The placement inside the box the weight of the box
110 78400
204
lxw the number of lxh boxes inside a shape The space inside a shape
140
LxW [area formula for circle]
2
The capacity it can hold inside Idk, how high it is
140 140 140
The inside of a The inside of the square and rectangle cylinder Inside Idk
14
96.3
1* 4
280
multiply Space inside an object Amount of space inside lwh The inside of a square or whatever the outside amount of space around lw I think LxW The area of a 3D object ?
403.92
32 140 140 140
1 A 280 107.6* ? 3 2*
33
32
34 35 36 37 38
140 140
The measure of the the area of a surface shape on the outside, base x height will find it The space of a two The space of one dementional figure side of a 3 dementional figure (Length)(Width)= area
280
323
The space inside a 3 dementional figure
5 ? 55.3 1 A 5
140
The space inside an object
The area of the outside of a 3D object
How much an object can contain, hold inside it
[plugged in]
39 40 (Nadia) 41 140
The area inside the shape The space inside
The area on the height, weight, and outside covering the length of shape shape The space around The depth, width, and height
13 280
96.3 1830.3
F A
6 5 4
The total amount of
42 43 44 45 46 47
140 cubes matter something

takes up
the total area on the The space within a face of the shape shape that can be filled
280
289
140 140 140
space inside something Is L*H it when you figure out the whole thing The inside of shape The measurement of the flat inside? [figure] The area is inside the circle [with formula]
Perimeter of 3D object
Space in cylinder
93x35 1830.33 98 323
5* 2 4
2*l*H when you this is V=l*H [fig of figure out the top so cylinder] like [fig of cyl] The area of the ? base? The measurement of The inside outside [figure] measurement [figure] the surface area is also inside the circle but at the circle Area around an object, so is it the same as premeter
48
30-45
96.3
something to do with base and height 45.33*
Area is everything
49
16,20,28? inside an object
408*
50 51 52
140 140 140
How many the measurement of Idk inches/feet/whatever the top of the shape is in a shape The area is the inside The outside of the of the object object [circle example] The mass of the object [cube example]
F 280 280 5491 [correct]
4 5
21
5.2 Case study: Travis

Travis is a tenth grade student in my afternoon section of Geometry. While often classied as a troublemaker with low grades, he clearly has a competitive streak and strong memory. His personal goal for the Geometry class is to take and pass the Regents exam with a score of 85 or above (i.e. the highest bracket). He can be sloppy when working on mathematics problems, but is often able to provide more precision when prompted. From Traviss pre-assessment, it is clear that he has some prior knowledge of area, surface area, and volume, but that they are somewhat muddled. For his denition of area, he provides the amount inside a gure, for surface area, the distance around a gure, and for volume, the mass of a gure. When calculating the volume of both prisms on the pre-assessment, he nds all three dimensions and squares their product, thus for the rectangular prism giving the square of the correct answer and for the triangular prism giving the square of twice the correct answer. Also notable is that when asked for the surface area of a rectangular prism he provides the volume. When calculating the volume of a pyramid on the pre-assessment, he uses one dimension of the base rather than the area of the base when applying the formula for volume. All of this data suggests that his understanding of the three-dimensional nature of volume is shaky in a computational context. In contrast to this, his answer on Question 9 is simple, clear, and seemingly correct (see Figure 5.2.1). My interview with Travis took place on the fourth day of the unit following the preassessment, at which point we had explored the surface area and volume of rectangular prisms, triangular prisms, and cylinders. By this point, he seemed to have more articulate descriptions of surface area and volume. For example, he describes surface area as all the areas of faces added up of a 3D shape, an understanding emphasized in class when studying prisms (but rephrased in his own words).
22
Figure 5.2.1. Traviss response to Question 9 on the pre-assessment.
Near the beginning of the interview, I present Travis with two rectangular prisms of equal volume and dierent dimensions (a red 2 cm by 5 cm by 12 cm prism and a green 3 cm by 5 cm by 8 cm prism). It is here that he still demonstrates some confusion on the interaction between dierent measures of three dimensional shapes. For example, he (like most of the interviewees) selects the green prism. When asked why he chose the green prism, he replies because the height is bigger than this [red] one. . . oh no, but the width is the same. . . I think the height makes the dierence. When asked why the height made the dierence, he replies that multiplying by the height is the last step to nd volume. It seems then that part of his confusion stems from his procedural understanding of how to nd volume of a rectangular prism. However, he gives a correct process for comparing the volume numerically and seems satised by his process for comparing the volume of the two prisms. When asked two which would you compute questions, it becomes clearer that Traviss understanding of volume is heavily dependent on the context of the problem. For example, he correctly claims that he would want to nd the volume of a rectangular prism in order to answer the question How much air is in this room? For this simpler question, the language allows him to answer because. . . its inside of the room, and volume is inside. However, when asked about how to nd the amount of stone to build one of the Great
23
Pyramids of Giza (of which I show him a picture), he quickly chooses surface area. His reason: Its a structure you build from the outside not inside. . . you build a pyramid from the outside so I say surface area. His confusion on the problem has nothing to do with his abstract notions of volume or surface area; rather he seems to have some diculty recognizing which is appropriate to compute in situations that are more ambiguous. Again his prior understandings outweigh clues in the problem when presented with the concrete slab problem. Asked to nd the cost of a concrete building foundation, he claims that this is surface area, because were looking for the foundation. He correctly computes the surface area of the shape, even remembering unprompted to include ft2 as the appropriate units. Especially in light of the fact that the phrase cubic foot is in the problem twice, I wonder what has caused Travis to be so condent that nding surface area is appropriate, and so I ask him. He replies that the foundation of a building is a like a base, which makes him think of surface area. Again, his ability to parse a problem is inhibited by some aspect of a procedure, this time the vocabulary used consistently when nding volume and surface area. While I did not get a chance to ask him, this exchange also makes me wonder what his understandings are of units such as ft2 and ft3 and how they relate to square feet and cubic feet. When asked about sizes of his favorite drink, he again shows that his understanding of volume (and especially how scaling aects it) is heavily context-dependent. He quickly answers twice as wide when asked whether he would rather double the height or the width of his favorite drink. However, he is unable to elaborate on his explanation until he looks back to the red and green prisms. He asks the clarifying question twice as wide, what happens to the width? and I motion with my hands. At this point, he is able to articulate; Oh the length gonna get bigger too, if you do it the wide way, its going to be the width and the length.
24
This response convinces me that Traviss understanding of the dierent measures of a shape (dimensions, surface area, and volume) are clearest when working with rectangular prisms and realistic questions like How much air is in the room? While he is shakier dealing with other shapes, he is often able to draw analogies or break down a problem into simpler cases in a way that suggests he has a reasonable conceptual understanding of volume supported by healthy mathematical habits of mind. The questions I asked him gave him more trouble the more parsing was necessary. Overall, our interview suggested that while his abstract notions of surface area and volume are relatively strong, they are not exible or abstract enough to guide him through a problem with mixed context clues like the concrete problem. After his interview, I used more time in further interviews trying to get at what specic words in problems led to students decisions.
5.3 Case study: Nadia

Nadia is another strong student and like Travis is in the 85+ Regents group. At the time of our interview, she had the highest grade of all the students in all sections. She is articulate and often able to reect on her own understandings and correct her own mistakes, both computational and conceptual. She seems to be one of the few students who never confuses volume and mass, answering on the pre-assessment that neither quantity is immediately related to answering the question How heavy is a box of books? On the pre-assessment, her ability to nd the volume of objects still seems rooted in rectangular prisms; like approximately a dozen other students, she gives twice the correct answer for the volume of a triangular prism (no students answered the question correctly) and gives the depth, width, and height as a denition of volume. In our interview (which took place after we started looking at cylinders), it seems she has taken care to rene her ideas. Her description of volume is not only correct but far from any notion discussed in class: how much can t into something. . . like I imagine a
25
bowl, and the cover of the bowl, and how much will t into the bowl, that wont break the cover. When asked about surface area, she gives the example of the Earths crust. When asked which rectangular prism has a greater volume, she refuses even to pick one, instead condently stating you would nd their volume and compare; length, width, height. When asked about nding the amount of air in the classroom, she gives a precise explanation: Volume. . . because its how much is in a room. . . my main words are in or around, volume is in and surface area is around. Like Travis, she is good at looking for key words in the problem given and says that when she sees one of those two words, she usually doesnt think any harder about which to compute. Also like Travis, she answers that one would nd surface area to calculate the amount of stone necessary to build a pyramid, and gives a similar answer, showing similarly that her abstract understanding of surface area, volume, and their distinction is not what is throwing her o, but rather the real-world context of the problem itself. This is further conrmed by the ease with which she described the process for nding the volume and surface area of a complex solid (a square pyramid on top of a rectangular prism). DP: How would you nd the volume of this weird shape? Nadia: Cut it up into shapes. [Draws the pyramid and prism separately and shows me.] Id break it up into dierent shapes, youd add them together. DP: What about nding the surface area of that shape? How would you do that? Nadia: Id break it up again? But that base is shared, I wouldnt necessarily add that base twice. Its one base, I wouldnt add it twice. . . wait, wait, you wouldnt add it all, its practically inside it! When asked how she would solve the concrete foundation problem, Nadia starts by drawing a rectangular prism. When asked why she did this, she gives an interesting explanation: When I think of buildings, because I live in New York, I think of them as tall rectangles, at tops!. . . the foundation. . . thats underneath it right? [DP: Yes.] Its for one of the bases, probably for the bottom base, so Id nd the area of the bottom base. . . wait! Cubic foot, so that means. . . when I think of cubic foot I think of volume. . . oh yeah, you probably just nd the volume of that. . .
26
Like Travis, she absorbs much of the context of the problem when guring out where to start. However, it seems that she also searches for mathematical clues which cause her to revise her rst ideas. It is this response that leads me to believe her conceptual understanding of volume is quite deep in that she can weather misleading words and information in such problems. While able to isolate context clues, she does not lean on them to the exclusion of her abstract notion of volume.
Figure 5.3.1. Nadias work on the last question in our interview.
Her notion of volume is strong enough that she tentatively makes statements in our interview like sometimes I think about a pyramid and cone as the same, maybe I shouldnt.
27
Without having formally been taught about these shapes, she recognizes that pyramids and cones are related in that their volumes are found in similar ways, yet when asked why she is concerned about conating the two, she says that it is because they probably have dierent formulas. It seems that even she still sees volume formulas as less related than they are. She is also the only student interviewed to prove to me that doubling the width of a cylinder increases the volume more than doubling the height, and even recognizes that she need not compute the volume of the original cylinder (see Figure 5.3.1). She is the only student interviewed who quickly switches over into the language of cylinders and volume unprompted. This suggests that while other students answered this question correctly and were able to compute the volume of a cylinder when called such, much of Nadias mathematical strength is in knowing when to switch in and out of the context of a problem. She is often able to attain hints from the context of a problem, but does not rely on it so heavily as to let context clues mislead her.
5.4 Case study: Yolanda

Yolanda is absent from class more often than Travis and Nadia, and has voiced her frustration to me over her gaps. However, from previous units it was already clear to me that she is strong when it comes to reading and parsing geometry problems, but that she has diculty with computation. Our interview was conducted approximately four days into the unit, at which point we had explored prisms. She is part of the 75+ Regents group and our interview was the rst conducted for this project. On the pre-assessment, she attempts to calculate the volume of a rectangular prism by adding two copies of each dimension, getting 32 inch cubes, suggesting that she is confused about the three-dimensional nature of volume, instead trying to nd some sort of three-dimensional version of perimeter. She gives no denition of surface area or volume
28
on the pre-assessment. However, her struggles to calculate volume do not seem to stem from any lack of spatial ability; she is one of only four students who seems to correctly identify both nets on question 5 of the pre-assessment, a question with so few correct answers it is not even included in Table 1 above. During our interview, her description of volume is a bit more eshed out, if still shaky. She describes volume as what could t into an object. . . you have an object and you put something else in it, it has to be a certain size. . . you know how you measure it in like, cubes, cubic and stu? So I think about it in cubes. This is one of the notions of volume that had been discussed in class. While the cubes notion seems to convey a solid idea of volume, it seems that Yolanda has not abstracted this into a more universal concept of volume, for when asked to compare the volume of the green and red rectangular prisms, she says this one is wider. . . it could be bigger cubes, but then again this one could be like tiny ones, you could t a lot of tiny little ones and its going to be more than this [green] one. When asked to compare their surface area, she refers back to a (correct) formula from memory, stating that she would calculate and compare. However, with her discussion of smaller cubes and larger cubes in mind, it seems that she might not have a strong concept of what that formula is helping her to compare. Her notion of volume is related to that of volume (packing) described in [3], but a supercial component of that notion (the size of a single cube) has led to a misconception. Her reliance on particular formulas for particular shapes to inform her idea of volume shows up again when discussing how to calculate the amount of air in the classroom: DP: Would you rather calculate volume, surface area, or neither to nd out how much air is in this room? Yolanda: Volume. DP: Why do you say volume? Yolanda:The air is in the room, and the volume is whats inside the thing. DP: How would you do that? Yolanda: Go by the formula, with the base and the height, so you get the
5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS bottom, that would be the base, and the height, right? No,no, no, no, its a square, so the length, the width, and height!
29
Even though her rst method would have worked, we have only used that method in class to nd the volume of non-rectangular prisms, and thus it seems that Yolanda thinks that a formula that works for all prisms only works for non-rectangular ones. This suggests that perhaps that she does not always have a unied concept of volume when solving problems, where by unied, I mean an idea that the same type of answer is desired regardless of the shape at hand. Yolanda is the only student interviewed to claim condently that one needs to nd the volume of a pyramid to nd the amount of stone required to build it; in fact, she makes a case for needing to know both volume (to nd the total amount of stone) and surface area (to nd the stone on the outside). When we look at the formula for the volume of a pyramid, which was provided in the interview on a formula sheet but not yet discussed in class, she quickly provides a reasonable rationale for the coecient 1 . 3
1 DP: Lets look at the formula. . . why do you think we need the 3 , the base and the height? Yolanda: The height is included in the thing, the base, you need to calculate whats inside. . . and the third because its not a whole, like, rectangle. . . you know how for a triangle its half, so Im guessing for that its a third.
Even though her denition of volume is shaky, she is skilled at reasoning by analogy. Indeed in this case her analogy is especially apt in light of the fact that the cocients in the formulas for area of a triangle and volume of a pyramid can be viewed as the coecients that arise when taking the antiderivate of a linear and quadratic function, respectively. This is another piece of evidence that Yolanda relies heavily on a combination of her knowledge of formulas and her ability to reason out a problem through pattern-matching and analogy, perhaps without ever having a clear concept of volume.
30
This shows up in particular when she struggles with the concrete foundation problem. First, she asks what a slab is (note: the word slab is used in the original Regents exam problem and there is no accompanying gure), suggesting that she is heavily reliant on non-mathematical context clues, especially in light of the fact that she answers in the negative when I ask if the phrase cubic foot helps her to solve the problem. Second, she begins by saying you go by the formula, rst using a method for nding the volume of a triangular prism before correcting herself. From our interview it seems that Yolanda uses the context of problems and her strong memory of vocabulary and formulas to help her solve problems, all the while still struggling to develop an abstract notion of volume.
5.5 Case study: Ryan

Ryan is one of the few ninth graders in my Geometry classes, having passed the Algebra Regents exam in middle school. He is a member of the 85+ Regents group, but his performance on tests in the class ranges from failing grades to one of the highest grades across all the sections. He is a very quiet student but is willing to participate in class discussion when directly asked to do so. From Ryans pre-assessment (and interview), it seems that he has conated the notions of mass and volume and that he has diculty translating between the idea of volume and questions such as asking how many unit cubes would t in a given rectangular prism. For example, on the pre-assessment, he gives an answer of 34 boxes to a question asking how many 1 inch cubes would t inside a box measuring 5 inches by 7 inches by 4 inches. Since I forgot to ask him about this question during our interview, the only interpretation of his answer I can make is that perhaps he found twice the sum of each dimension and made some minor calculation error. It also seems that he has diculty with visualizing (or
31
at least describing) three-dimensional shapes; on the pre-assessment, he gives triangle as the shape formed by a net which actually folds into a pyramid. In our interview, he articulates his denition of volume, which seems to be a mix of correct and incorrect ideas: volume. . . is basically, like, the inside of an object, like how much the mass is. . . any type of object, could be a chair, a desk, could be a paper, a box. Notably he gives concrete examples as opposed to many of the other interviewees who stick to prisms, cylinders, and so on unless prompted by the context of a problem. Like most of the interviewees, he claims that, of the red and green prism, the green has a greater volume. Like many of the others, his evidence is that the height is taller, but follows up quickly with you would nd the volume, so you would do length times width times height for both and see what your answer is and compare. He seems at ease describing the method for nding volume as he refers to the physical objects in front of us, showing me the length, width, and height. When asked how to nd the amount of air in the room, Ryan replies volume. . . because the air is in the room, youre not trying to nd like how big the room is. To him, it seems that the notion of how big is more closely tied to surface area, while volume is a property of the material of which an object is made. His notions of surface area and volume are rooted in concrete examples, which makes me wonder if there is a connection between his conceptual understandings and the fact that he seems to (unusually for the class) have a harder time with abstract computational volume problems than problems in context. This shows up again when I ask him how to nd the volume of a shape Ive drawn, a cylinder with a cone attached at one end and a hemisphere at the other. He asks rst is that a cone, with ice cream on top of it? before proceeding to answer that one would nd the volume of the half circle [i.e. hemisphere, again with visualization problems] rst and then the cone type and then the cylinder and add them to nd the total volume.
32
Like many of my geometry students, Ryan often uses names of polygons and other two-dimensional shapes when referring to three-dimensional shapes that resemble them (e.g. triangle for pyramid). However, in our interview, he states that he has a hard time seeing and drawing three-dimensional shapes, which suggests that, at least for him, confusing the terminology is not just a vocabulary-based slip-up. When looking at the concrete problem, he says you start by drawing a rectangle, of course it would be 3D, but I dont know how to draw it like that, and struggles to do so for a short while. In this problem he leans on the context of the problem, and like several other interviewees concludes that surface area is necessary, explaining that the concrete is the foundation of a building, perhaps associating the foundation with a face of a three-dimensional object, not unlike when he answers surface area for the Pyramid of Giza question. It seems then to me that Ryans diculties in solving surface area and volume problems come from his diculty visualizing abstract three-dimensional objects. He is quick to solve problems when physical shapes (such as the red and green prisms) are in front of him, and seems less likely in these situations to confuse surface area, volume, and mass. While he is condent when working with manipulatives, he has a hard time taking a problem in context and abstracting it, thus shying away from visualizations. He was the only student I interviewed who showed me work on paper during our interview and never drew a shape. On the favorite drink question, he tried to show to me that both volumes were equivalent by starting with values for the area of the base and the height of a cylinder, doubling each in turn, and substituting into the volume formula (see Figure 5.5.1). It seems then that Ryans problem solving strategies involving volume and surface area avoid visualization perhaps because he nds it dicult. His reliance on concrete objects when giving examples and solving problems further suggest that his abstract and concrete understanding of volume and surface area are both somewhat correct but relatively disconnected.
33
Figure 5.5.1. Ryans work on the last question in our interview.
5.6 Case study: Isabella

Isabella was one of two students I interviewed not signed up to take the Regents exam, instead taking the class only for mathematics credit. While low-skilled in some ways, she can be a hard worker, willing to re-examine her own ideas and check her work, and often takes the time and eort to clear up her own misunderstandings and ask for help. It seems from her pre-assessment that, in addition to associating these quantities with rectangular prisms (the box), she has two misconceptions about area, surface area, and volume. The rst is that, like Ryan, she confuses volume with another quality of threedimensional objects; her denition is the weight of the box. Second, she seems to have a misconception about area (see Figure 5.6.1). This shows up in two questions on the pre-assessment; when nding the volumes of a triangular prism and pyramid, she correctly multiplies her answer for the area of the base by the height (and by
1 3
for the pyramid), but in each case nds the area of the base by
adding the dimensions given (see Figure 5.6.2).
34
Figure 5.6.1. Isabellas pre-assessment denitions of area, surface area, and volume.
Figure 5.6.2. Isabellas solution to Problem 8 on the pre-assessment.
35
Isabella is the only interviewee who states explicitly that her concept of volume has changed over the course of the unit: When I think about volume, when I rst thought about volume, I thought it was like something like, how much the object weighs or how much it holds, but after we learned about what volume is or whatever, I learned that its about what can t inside, how big the shape is. However, her working knowledge of volume still seems shaky, since when asked about the green and red prisms, she answers green. . . because when we did the project in class, we learned that the smaller the object is, the more volume that it had. (The project to which she refers included a discussion of surface area to volume ratio, the major observation being that smaller boxes usually had a higher ratio.) As a student, she claims that she often has to rely on formulas, and the green/red prisms question is one for which she does, saying I think you have to do length times width times height to gure out the volume. . . you could do the same equation on both. Isabella seems to lack condence in her own computational skills and ability. For example, she interprets my questions in the following way: DP:Would you rather gure out volume, surface area, or neither in order to nd out how much air is in this room? Isabella: For the room, I would rather gure out how much volume is in it, because I gure volume is easier because you just have to gure out the length width and the height of the room and you could gure out all those measurements with a ruler and then gure out the volume. DP [later]: Would you rather gure out volume, surface area, or neither to nd out how much stone to build this (very famous) pyramid? Isabella: Surface area than the volume, because nding the length, the width, and the height of the pyramid, it would take a lot to gure that out. . . because you could easily measure the surface area of the pyramid. For each of these questions, Isabella does not seem to consider which quantity would be more appropriate, but instead takes my question as asked and provides which quantity she would prefer to calculate. Previously, I thought that part of the wording of the question was unimportant, but Isabellas responses showed me how a student, especially one not condent in their problem-solving ability, might perceive what I am looking for when
36
asking such a question. In short, her responses made me wonder later what was her concept of where a right answer comes from in mathematics. Her responses when working with the concrete question supported this interpretation of how she solves problems, as well as why she (and many other students) have a hard time guring out whether to nd volume or surface area: Isabella: I want to say volume because I feel like its more to work with than it is for surface area. . . I dont know. . . I could use the 15 feet by 15 feet by 2 as length, width, height, yeah! DP: How do you know that nding volume would help you answer the question? Isabella: Because. . . I dont know. . . the fact that it gives us the measurements. . . it makes me think that I could use volume to answer this question, but once it comes up to the cost. . . and then I would try to divide it by two or multiply by two to get a possible answer. She does not seem to notice that the measurements could also be used to nd surface area, suggesting that one of the reasons my students have diculty deciding whether to nd surface area or volume is that problems involving either often provide the same numerical information. It seems that, somewhat like Yolanda, she is able to get by solving many problems by pattern matching and using the fact that most of the problems given her provide precisely the amount and type of information necessary to solve the problem. Similarly, she explains the coecient of
1 3
in the volume formula for a pyramid by analogy
to the relationship between a rectangle and a triangle. She does not seem to be as strong as Yolanda when it comes to memorizing formulas and the names of three-dimensional shapes, and thus she has a harder time picking what procedure to use. Isabella strikes me as representative of many of the sharp students in my classes who are struggling. She uses her critical thinking skills to search for patterns, draw analogies, and identify important information, all good mathematical habits of mind. However, she has a hard time distinguishing between mathematical patterns and patterns found in high school math problems (e.g. only appropriate information is ever given). Furthermore, some of her work is internally consistent, but incorrect due to some older misunderstanding (e.g.
37
her misconception of area). My interview with Isabella left me primarily with the question of how I can better harness the reective ability of students like her to prevent and repair such misconceptions.
5.7 Case study: Martha

Martha is one of the students in my classes with the weakest skills. She is not signed up for the Regents exam and is classied as a special education student. However, she often participates actively in discussion in class, asks questions, and provides a mix of correct and incorrect answers during mini-lessons. Unlike most of the students in my classes, her grasp of surface area seems to be stronger than that of volume. For example, to nd the volume of a prism on the pre-assessment, she adds the dimensions, but seems to give a more accurate denition for surface area, drawing an arrow pointing to the lateral area of the cylinder (see Figures 5.7.1 and 5.7.2).
Figure 5.7.1. Marthas solution to Problem 2 on the pre-assessment.
By the time of our interview (following prisms and cylinders), she seems to be more condent in her understanding of volume, even reaching an understanding that allows her to circumvent her own computational diculties. Her denition of volume is how much
38
Figure 5.7.2. Marthas denition of surface area.
something can t inside, like a box, or like in a cylinder, or something like that and surface area is the whole perimeter of a shape, like all the faces. Like all interviewees, she selects the green prism as having more volume, but is unique among the interviewees in her method for verifying her answer: DP: Why the green prism? Martha: It may be a little bit small, but it has much more space than the red one. DP: Is there a way you could prove to me that the green prism has a larger volume than the red one? Martha: We could put stu inside the green one and put stu inside the red box. DP:. . . how would that tell us if we were right? Martha: We could just put the same amount, how much it could t in the green one, we could put, say, beans or something, we could put it here [green] and the same amount here [red] and see if like, which one holds more. She returns to the concept of volume (lling) mentioned in [3] when asked how she would nd the volume of a cylinder attached to a cone. In light of her method for nding volume, her answer to Problem 9 on the pre-assessment makes much more sense (see Figure 5.7.3). Like Ryan, she seems to see volume as a quantity less intrinsic to an object than surface area. For example, when asked about the amount of air in the room, she decides on surface area, because youre gonna need how big, how large is the room in order to see how much air youre gonna need. Although she and Ryan have dierent answers, their answers to this question reveal how they might associate surface area more closely with an object than volume.
39
Figure 5.7.3. Marthas answer to Question 9 on the pre-assessment.
Martha denitely has the hardest time with the last three problems we look at in our interview, and her answers suggest her notions of surface area as the size of a shape and volume as the inside of a hollow shape are at the heart of her misconceptions. Martha: [in reference to the concrete problem] Wouldnt you have to gure out both, the surface area and the volume? DP: Why would you have to gure out both? Martha: Because rst the surface area, because youve gotta see the amount of space youre gonna take, and the volume because of how many things could t inside. . . DP: [later, on favorite drink question] Why would you choose twice as wide? Martha: Wide is means its more, tall is just like a little bit, its just in a bigger. . . because twice is wide is like, its bigger and it has a lot of fruit punch insdie, and twice as tall, its tall but it has the same amount. Marthas notion of volume seems tied to whether or not a three-dimensional object is hollow. It seems to me that, to her, the volume of an object is related to, but physically disjoint from, the object itself. Like many of the other interviewees, her conceptual understanding was shaky and sometimes overwritten by mathematically unimportant aspects of the contexts of the problems.
6
Reection and Implications
First, this project has led me to reect on the way that my students have developed a conceptual understanding of volume. The students who had the most accurate denitions and concepts of volume did not always solve the most problems in our interviews, leading me to wonder what other factors were in play and how their concept of volume did or did not help them through a problem. Many of the students interviewed in this project had a concept of volume rooted in their strongest areas. For example, Ryan dened volume in terms of concrete objects (since he has diculty drawing and visualizing abstract threedimensional shapes) and Marthas notion of volume is close to that of volume (lling) described in [3], perhaps to account for her relatively low computational and spatial skills. Many students concepts of volume also led me to believe that some of their misconceptions were actually rooted in their misunderstanding of length and area, leading me to wonder how I would remediate such misunderstanding while simultaneously moving forward with new material. Second, I came to understood over the course of this project that each mathematical question I ask of a student is often much more than just a mathematical question to
6. REFLECTION AND IMPLICATIONS
41
them. For example, several students interviewed answered surface area to the concrete problem and in most cases this answer stemmed from confusion over what the foundation of a building was. Especially given that the concrete problem was a real Regents exam problem with only the numbers changed, I am concerned that too many math problems my students encounter are confusing instead of hard. While I or some other mathematically well-trained person is skilled at accurately abstracting away the context of a problem precisely when necessary, even many of my strongest students are not. This has led me to believe that this ability is a separate mathematical habit of mind that must be focused on and taught explicitly in mathematics classrooms, since so often I found that the question I intended to ask was not the question my students heard. My students conceptions of volume and their interpretation and parsing of problems interacted in the following way. Those who were most comfortable thinking about volume abstractly and articulating their ideas about volume were often most able to solve the problems presented in our interviews and provided stronger justications for their answers. In constrast, many of my students have a moderate grasp of volume, but their concept of volume is still rooted in some articial aspect of the analogy they use. For example, Yolanda was unable to answer the prism question completely since here cube-based idea of volume was awed in that she considered the number of cubes in a shape without regard to their volume. The students with these types of understandings seemed more likely to be misled by the context of the problems we looked at, and this has led me to conclude that a strong conceptual understanding of volume is not just nice to have, but crucial for solving problems that go beyond basic formulas and computation. This further implies that an analogy used in class may not be received by students in the same spirit in which it was given, and that we as teachers must always be careful to (1) identify where analogies break down and (2) provide as many of them as possible in order to provide as many dierent entry points to understanding dicult abstract concepts.
42
The benets of this deeper level of understanding show up in the problem-solving habits of students like Nadia (and Travis to a certain extent). With her strong, exible, and unied notion of volume, she was able not only to extract useful clues from the context of problems, but also to sort out and throw away misleading or mathematically supercial components of problems. It is this sort of condence in problem solving that I hope to build in my own students. Before this project, I feel that I saw knowledge of mathematical concepts and problem solving habits as critical, but more separable than they actually are. By watching a student like Travis break down a problem in front of him into simpler problems, I came closer to understanding that this sort of leap was only possible due to a robust notion of volume. While it may seem obvious that these are related, I feel that it is too easy for me and others teaching mathematics to keep mathematical habits and mathematical concepts too far apart from each other even when focusing on both. As I tried to include hands-on activities in my unit and manipulatives-based questions in my interviews, I was surprised by what understandings my students did or did not carry over with them to more abstract problems or problems without accompanying physical objects. I assumed that some time playing with real rectangular prisms made out of cardstock would make it easy to move on to more standard forms of assessment on prisms. Instead, I found that, especially for students with a weaker conceptual notion of volume to begin with, leaving manipulatives behind was not just dicult, but so dicult that it made me question how many of my students had actually deepened their knowledge of volume and surface area. They may have been better at computational volume problems, but how much did their ability to memorize formulas mask a continued lack of understanding that working with manipulatives was supposed to clear up? This has left me with one major resolution for my future classroom. If I am going to use manipulatives, then I must include in my plans for how they are used how my students will grow out of using them as well. Furthermore, I should not just use them because they temporarily make solving particular
43
problems easier; instead, it is all the more important that I focus on what deeper notions I want my students to gain. In terms of the data collection of this project, I encountered several diculties that have certain implications for my rst year of teaching. First, it is dicult to collect meaningful data. With dozens of students turning in several assignments a week, it is hard to sort out what reveals what about my students thinking processes (as opposed to their ability to provide answers). Students are absent, they have bad days, they have crazy days, they have days where they answer every question correctly but refuse to show their work. Second, as intended, my interviews with my students provided me with much more insight into their thought processes than their classwork or my shorter interactions with them in class. Many of them were much more articulate and deliberate than in class, making me wish that such a conversation was a requisite part of the class for each student. This has made me wonder how to create this atmosphere in my future classroom. One aspect of doing this would be to hold myself back more from correcting students as they solve problems, something which I sometimes struggled to do during interviews. Furthermore, while I dont think Im quite yet ready to implement one-on-one conferences in my classroom, I would like somehow to build space for these sorts of low-stakes extended mathematical conversations, especially with my struggling students. This is crucial since every interviewee (even Nadia) surprised me at least once not just with a misconception, but with the cause of that misconception. For example, Travis thought the Great Pyramids at Giza were hollow and Yolanda thought that unit cubes could have dierent sizes. It seems then that one of the greatest diculties I or any math teacher faces is how to nd these misconceptions and help students recognize and correct them; I am sure that many of my eorts at self-improvement in my teaching will be towards this goal.
Bibliography
[1] M.T. Battista, On Greenos Environmental/Model View of Conceptual Domains: A Spatial/Geometric Perspective, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 25 (1994), 86-94. [2] M.T. Battista and D.H. Clements, Students Understanding of Three-Dimensional Rectangular Arrays of Cubes, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 27 (1996), 258-292. [3] M. Curry and L. Outhred, Conceptual Understanding of Spatial Measurement, PME Conference (2006), 265-272. [4] Beverly Falk and Megan Blumenreich, The Power of Questions: A Guide to Teacher and Student Research, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH, 2005. [5] D.L. Gabel and L.G. Enochs, Dierent Approaches for Teaching Volume and Students Visualization Ability, Science Education 71 (1987), 591-597. [6] Herbert P. Ginsburg, The Challenge of Formative Assessment in Mathematics Education: Childrens Minds, Teachers Minds, Human Development 52 (2009), 109-128. [7] M.G. and P.W. Hewson, Eect of Instruction Using Students Prior Knowledge and Conceptual Change Strategies on Science Learning, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 20 (1983), 731-743. [8] M. Isiksal et. al., A Study on Investigating 8th Grade Students Reasoning Skills on Measurement: The Case of Cylinder, Education and Science 35 (2010), 61-70. [9] The New York State School Report Card Accountability and Overview Report 20102011: Bronx Academy of Letters, New York State Education Department, 2011. [10] J. Piaget and B. Inhelder, The Childs Conception of Space, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1956. [11] J. Piaget et. al., The Childs Conception of Geometry, Basic Books, New York, 1960.
Appendix
Following is a selection of materials used in this project. In order, they are: 1. A copy of the pre-assessment given on May 9. 2. An outline of clinical interview questions asked of students. 3. A copy of the questions that were shown to students on paper during interviews. 4. The lesson plan and task from the day during which students investigated rectangular prisms. 5. A copy of the pertinent problems on the Regents version of the Learning Target Assessment of May 16. 6. The lesson plan and task from the day during which students investigated cylinders.
Clinical Interview Outline: Students Conceptions of Volume and Surface Area 1. What are your definitions of volume and surface area? 2. [Present rectangular prism] How many 1cm cubes would fit inside this prism? What information would you need? a. What could I do to this prism to make its volume half that of the original volume? i. How could you check that your strategy for shrinking the prism gives you the correct answer? ii. Are there any other ways you could halve the volume of this prism? b. How would the volume change if I made this prism three times as tall (or stacked three copies of this prism on top of one another)? i. How did you decide to do that? ii. How could you verify that your method worked? c. [Two prisms with equal volume] Which of these two prisms has a greater volume? i. How did you decide which had greater volume? ii. How would you verify your answer? iii. How would you convince a friend you were correct? 3. Using formulas: If I wanted to find [x], what formula would I use / how would I find it? a. How much air is in this room? b. How much stone to build this pyramid [of Giza]? c. For each question: how did you decide what formula to use? What does each piece of the formula tell you? d. [various complex solids, such as triangular prism with triangular pyramid on top]. How would I find the volume of this shape? Could you write a formula for how to find the surface area? What does each piece of your formula mean? 4. Regents-type problems: Show me how you would go about solving these three problems. a. Problem 1: Concrete is purchased by the cubic foot. How much will it cost to pour a 15 ft by 15 ft by 2 ft slab for the foundation of a building if concrete costs $2.00 a cubic foot? b. Problem 2:
c. Problem 3: If you had a bottle of your favorite drink, would you rather get a can that is twice as tall or twice as wide? d. For each problem: i. What would you do first? ii. How did you know that you needed to find volume/surface area? iii. How do you know your answer makes sense?
[The following is a copy of the problems discussed in the interview as shown to students. The only differences are that their copies contained more page breaks and they were provided with the standard Regents Geometry Examination formula sheet.-DP]
What is your definition of volume? What is your definition of surface area? 1. How much air is in this room? 2. How much stone to build this pyramid?
3. How would I find the volume of this shape? [shape drawn during interview, differed from student to student.] Problem 1: Concrete is purchased by the cubic foot. How much will it cost to pour a 15 ft by 15 ft by 2 ft slab for the foundation of a building if concrete costs $2.00 a cubic foot? Problem 2:
Problem 3: If you had a bottle of your favorite drink, would you rather get a can that is twice as tall or twice as wide?
Unit: Surface Area and Volume Lesson: Introduction to volume and prisms Essential Questions: What is volume? How do we find it? Where do our formulas for volume come from? Objective: By the end of the lesson, SWBAT find the volume of rectangular (and other simple) prisms. SWBAT define a prism and describe its key characteristics, as well as give examples and non-examples. NYS Standards: G.G.10: Know and apply that lateral edges of a prism are congruent and parallel. G.G.11: Know and apply that two prisms have equal volumes if their bases have equal areas and their altitudes are equal. G.G.12: Know and apply that the volume of a prism is the product of the area of the base and the altitude. Assessment Two rectangular prism problems from pre-assessment Do Now: assess for understanding of definition Check specifically for understanding of rectangular and triangular prism volume during investigation. Frayer model exit ticket on definition of prism. Section Do Now Description Students will work on two simple volume problems similar to those on pre-assessment Go over two Do Now problems Time Reminders 5 (5) Circulate and CFU min Materials/media Do now slips
Debrief Do Now Minilesson/Notes
3(8) min 10 (18) min
Focus on concept of volume, move towards area X altitude
Whiteboard
Settle on definition of prism, as well as important characteristics. Model how to draw and label prisms. Solve several straightforward example problems as a class. Discuss how to make net for rectangular prism. Investigation Students will work through task involving (1) finding volumes, (2)
Overhead and transparencies.
25 (43) min
Circulate, ask students questions about their own thinking FIRST,
Investigation sheets, paper and scissors to make
Debrief problems Exit
scale factor for prisms, and (3) finding missing quantities when two prisms are known to have equal volumes. Go over problems and student-created investigation prisms Frayer model exit ticket on definition of prism, two Regents-type problems
ask them to discuss with tablemates SECOND, ask prompting questions THIRD, clarify LAST 5 (48) 7 (55) Emphasis on strategy, keep eye out for people to interview Push for drawn and real-world examples of both, as well as illustrative nonexamples
nets for rectangular prisms.
Overhead, models
Exit slips
Geometry Investigation PRISMS MADE OF NETS
Name:_______________ May 10, 2012
NOTE: If you want a challenge, replace the word rectangular with right triangular. 1. Make a net for a rectangular prism out of the 1cm grid paper provided. 2. Find the area of each face. Write down each area on the appropriate face and here on your sheet. Use this information to find the surface area of your prism.
3. Cut out and fold your net to create a rectangular prism. Tape it together GRID SIDE OUT. 4. How many cubic cm of water would be needed to fill your prism to a depth of 1cm?
5. Find the volume of your prism.
6. Write down the surface area and volume of each of your groups prisms in the table below. INCLUDE UNITS! 7. Calculate the surface area to volume ratio by dividing: ratio = surface area / volume. 8. Sketch each of your groups three prisms in the boxes provided. Surface area Prism 1 Volume SA/Vol Sketch
Prism 2
Prism 3
9. What do you observe about the prisms with high surface area to volume ratio versus those with low surface area to volume ratio? (If you want, ask for more data from other tables and add that to your comparison.)
10. Pick at least two (but preferably three) of the prisms at your table. Make an irregular shape at your table by attaching them along their faces. 11. Describe or draw this shape.
12. Find its surface area and volume. (UNITS!)
13. How do these compare to the surface area and volume of the original two (or more) prisms? Write one complete sentence for each of surface area and volume.
Version 1 Learning Target 20

I can define surface area and volume and recognize them in context.
Mastery
1. Demonstrates understanding of the definition of surface area and volume. 2. Correctly identifies contexts in which finding surface area and volume are appropriate.
Approaching Mastery
1. Demonstrates some understanding of the definition of surface area and volume. 2. May correctly identify contexts in which finding surface area and volume are appropriate.
Remote Mastery
1. May attempt to define surface area or volume.
1. What is surface area? _______________________________________________________________________________________ 2. What is volume? ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Give an example of a real-world object, its surface area, and its volume. (Think back to the table from yesterday.)
Object Surface Area Volume
4. To calculate how much air is in a room, you should calculate SURFACE AREA / VOLUME (circle one). 5. To calculate how much paint is on a house, you should calculate SURFACE AREA/ VOLUME (circle one). Learning Target 21
I can find the volume of basic prisms and use it to solve problems.
Mastery
1. Demonstrates understanding of volume and the definition of a prism. 2. Uses knowledge of the volume of a prism to solve for unknown information.
Approaching Mastery
1. Demonstrates understanding of volume and the definition of a prism. 2. May attempt to use knowledge of the volume of a prism to solve for unknown information.
Remote Mastery
1. Demonstrates some understanding of volume and prisms.
1. Find the volume of the triangular prism.
2. Find the volume of the rectangular prism.
Version 1 Learning Target 22

I can find the surface area of basic prisms and use it to solve problems.
Mastery
1. Demonstrates understanding of surface area and the definition of a prism. 2. Uses knowledge of the surface area of a prism to solve for unknown information.
Approaching Mastery
1. Demonstrates understanding of surface area and the definition of a prism. 2. May attempt to use knowledge of the surface area of a prism to solve for unknown information.
Remote Mastery
1. Demonstrates some understanding of surface area and prisms.
1. Find the surface area of the same triangular prism as before.
2. Find the surface area of the same rectangular prism as before.
David Price May 17, 2012 Spring supervisor: M. Krembs Mentor teacher: K. Silfies Bronx Academy of Letters Unit: Surface area and volume Lesson: Volume and lateral area of cylinders Essential Question: How do we extend our knowledge of prisms to solve problems involving cylinders? Objective: By the end of the lesson, SWBAT define a cylinder, find the volume of cylinders given adequate information, find the lateral area of cylinders given adequate information, and solve simple problems involving the volume and lateral area of cylinders. NYS Standards: G.G.14: Apply the properties of a cylinder, including: bases are congruent; volume equals the product of the area of the base and the altitude; lateral area of a right circular cylinder equals the product of an altitude and the circumference of the base. Assessment: Check understanding of prism knowledge in Do Now; can students remember what they know and apply it to the case of cylinders? Check for prism-cylinder comparisons on Do Nows; call on students with solid answers. Investigation: do students arrive at the formulas for lateral area and volume? Investigation: CFU of cm3 == mL connection. Independent practice: do students solve (non-Regents) the first, (Regents) the first two, or (challenge) all three of the independent practice problems for each investigation? Show of hands during debrief. Debrief: ask students to repeat vocabulary and formulas discovered. Exit ticket: one problem of each type, check also for units! (Sheet of harder problems for those who finish investigation early) Section Do Now Description Students will work on the Do Now, a triangular prism refresher and intro to cylinders Time Reminders 5 Circulate, narrate. CFU min of prism facts. Look out for students with good cylinder-prism comparisons. Challenge students who are done to find volume formula 7 Call on cold call plants! (12) CFU on formula. Check Min against prism knowledge. Circulate to ensure note taking. 12 Circulate, narrate. Check Materials/media Do now slips
Debrief Do Now
Go over Do Now, lead into formula for volume of a cylinder
Overhead, Do Now slips
Investigation ~7 minutes for students
Investigation
+ Practice
Debrief
to find the volume of their graduated cylinder/beaker and compare to the mL measurement marked. 5 min for IP. Go over formula discovered and IP.
(24) min.
for precision. Only measure height to mL mark! Circulate and check intentionally for understanding during IP. Show of hands on IP problems. Mention cm3 == mL. Ask students to repeat/rephrase. Same as before.
sheets, various cylinders.
5 (29) min 12 (41) min
Overhead, special debrief transparency. Various cylindrical groceries with lateral area labels, investigation sheets. Overhead, debrief transparency.
Investigation Same as before, but + practice with lateral area.
Full debrief
Exit ticket
Go over lateral area and IP. Recall earlier discoveries and prismcylinder comparison. Students will work quietly and independently on one of each type of problem.
9 (50) min 5 (55) min
Hit lateral area vs. total surface area. Rectangular nature of lateral area. CFU IP. Circulate, narrate. Compare performance vs. IP
Exit Slips
Geometry Cylinder Investigation
Name: _______________ May 17, 2012
Your task is to find the volume of your cylinder. Remember, just like with prisms, we need to multiply the ___________ and the area of the ___________.
Part I: Examine the Base
BUT FIRST: Record the highest mL marking on your beaker or cylinder here: _____ mL.
1.
What is the shape of the base of your cylinder? Shape: ___________.
2. What is the formula for the area of that shape? Area = ________. 3. Measure the diameter of your cylinder to the nearest TENTH of a centimeter. Diameter: ____________cm.
4. Based on the diameter you measured, what is the radius of your cylinder? Radius: ____________cm. Calculate the area of your face. Include units! Area= __________.
Part II: Find the Volume 5. Measure the height of your cylinder up to the highest marking. Height: ____________cm. 6. Using the formula from above, find the volume of your cylinder. Include units! Volume = ____________. 7. How does it compare to the mL mark at the top? __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
The second part of this task is to find the Surface Area. The surface area of a cylinder has three parts: top, bottom, and side.
Part I: Examine the Base 1. Find the area of the top face. 2. Find the area of the bottom face. 3. What is the circumference of these faces? Circumference = __________ cm. Part II: Find the Surface Area 4. Measure the height of your cylinder. Height: _________ cm. Area = _________cm2. Area = __________ cm2.
5. The area of the side is called the lateral area. In this case, the label represents the side. Carefully take off the label. It is in the shape of a __________________. 6. Length of the label = _____________ cm. 7. Width of the label = ______________ cm. 8. Find the lateral area of your cylinder by finding the area of your label. Lateral Area =__________ cm2. 9. Find the total surface area of your cylinder. Part III: Making Connections 10.What do you notice about the length and width of the label? __________________________________________________________________ 11. Complete the following equation: SA = _________cm2.
Lateral Area = (__________________ of the circle) x (_________ of the cylinder)

Students' Understanding of Volume and How It Affects Their Problem Solving

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Students' Understanding of Volume and How It Affects Their Problem Solving

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Students Understanding of Volume and How it Aects Their Problem Solving

Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 24, 2012

6 Reection and Implications Bibliography Appendix

1. INTRODUCTION, QUESTION, AND PURPOSE

2. SCHOOL AND CLASSROOM CONTEXT

4.1 Outline of surface area and volume unit

4.3 Clinical interviews

5.1 Pre-assessment analysis

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Table 1: Student pre-assessment data Student KEY 1 2 3 4 5 90 12 35 140 Q2 140 Area

8 16 inches (Martha) of cubes 9

116 inch measurement of a cubes shape

12.566 in any [?]

LxW [area formula for circle]

140 140 140

32 140 140 140

The space inside a 3 dementional figure

The space inside an object

The area of the outside of a 3D object

How much an object can contain, hold inside it

The area inside the shape The space inside

The total amount of

140 cubes matter something

140 140 140

93x35 1830.33 98 323

16,20,28? inside an object

140 140 140

F 280 280 5491 [correct]

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5.2 Case study: Travis

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.2.1. Traviss response to Question 9 on the pre-assessment.

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5.3 Case study: Nadia

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.3.1. Nadias work on the last question in our interview.

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5.4 Case study: Yolanda

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5.5 Case study: Ryan

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.5.1. Ryans work on the last question in our interview.

5.6 Case study: Isabella

adding the dimensions given (see Figure 5.6.2).

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.6.2. Isabellas solution to Problem 8 on the pre-assessment.

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

in the volume formula for a pyramid by analogy

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

5.7 Case study: Martha

Figure 5.7.1. Marthas solution to Problem 2 on the pre-assessment.

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.7.2. Marthas denition of surface area.

5. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Figure 5.7.3. Marthas answer to Question 9 on the pre-assessment.

Lateral Area = (__________ of the circle) x (_ of the cylinder)