Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

www.elsevier.com/locate/learninstruc

Enhancing students mathematical beliefs:

an intervention study
Lucia Mason
, Luisa Scrivani
Department of Developmental and Socialisation Psychology (DPSS), University of Padova,
Via Venezia 8, 35131 Padova, Italy

Abstract

This paper introduces a study aimed at ascertaining students beliefs about mathematics
and mathematical learning, as well as developing those beliefs and related variables by chan-
ging the classroom learning environment. Eighty-six fth graders were involved, divided in
two groups: one in the innovative learning environment (N 46) and the other in the tra-
ditional (N 40). The ndings provide evidence that the intervention contributed more than
traditional teaching to developing students mathematical beliefs, as well as to improving
their performance in solving usual and unusual word problems. Moreover, students self-
evaluation of their eorts in maths was higher in the innovative learning environment than
in the traditional. Mathematical beliefs contributed dierently to achievement in maths for
the two groups. The implications of the study are outlined.
# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Mathematical beliefs; Mathematics education; Mathematical beliefs development; Classroom

environment

1. Students beliefs about knowledge, knowing, and learning in mathematics

A line of research that has been ourishing over the last two decades regards stu-
dents epistemological beliefs, in general and in specic subject-matter domains
(Hofer & Pintrich, 1997, 2002). They have been dened in psychology as socially
shared intuitions about the nature of knowledge and the nature of learning (Jehng,
Johnson, & Anderson, 1993: p. 24). These beliefs, which underlie thinking and
reasoning processes and inuence cognitive performance, have been investigated

Corresponding author. Tel.: +39-049-827-6562; fax: +39-049-827-6511.
E-mail address: lucia.mason@unipd.it (L. Mason).

0959-4752/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.01.002
154 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

from the developmental point of view to examine the sequence of cognitive struc-
tures that become more sophisticated over time (e.g. King & Kitchener, 1994;
Kuhn, 1991; Perry, 1968). They have also been investigated from the educational
point of view to see how, and to what extent they aect learning and academic per-
formance (e.g. Kardash & Scholes, 1996; Mason, 2002, 2003a; Qian & Alvermann,
1995; Ryan, 1984; Schommer, 1990; Schommer, Crouse, & Rhodes, 1992).
Like fundamental assumptions about the nature and acquisition of knowledge
in particular domains, epistemological beliefs have been investigated mainly in
science and mathematics by analysing what students say when asked specic
questions. Mathematical beliefs are of particular interest in this study where they
are examined in quite young students, fth graders, who may have elaborated
convictions about the discipline on the basis of their experience of learning it at
school.
In 1983 the existence and inuence of a system of beliefs that drives students behav-
iour when trying to solve mathematical problems was pointed out by Schoenfeld
(1983). He maintained that problem-solving performance cannot be seen as purely
cognitive, in that students beliefs about what is useful in learning maths aects the
cognitive resources available to them in learning processes. The author (Schoenfeld,
1988, 1989, 1992) showed that even well-taught mathematics courses in 10th grade
geometry classes, which led to students doing well in standard performance measures,
failed in terms of the views students elaborated about the discipline itself. The author
revealed two separate representations of mathematics in students: school mathematics,
that is the discipline experienced in the classroom, mainly based on the application of
memorised procedures, and abstract mathematics, that is the discipline they have
never practised but only heard about, characterised by discovery and creativity. In
addition, students believed that if they could not solve a problem in a few minutes,
they should not waste time on it, as they would never nd its solution. Beliefs about
maths shape students behaviour and since they are powerful, can often produce nega-
tive consequences.
To identify and analyse students convictions in the domain, several other studies
have been carried out involving three categories of beliefs: (1) beliefs about math-
ematics, mathematical learning and problem-solving; (2) beliefs about the self in
relation to mathematics, and (3) beliefs about the social context of mathematical
learning, as a recent review by De Corte, Op t Eynde, and Verschael (2002) has
documented. It is not within the aims of this introduction to review all extant
research in this domain, but rather to synthesise the essential mathematics-related
beliefs that are relevant to the study reported below.

. The belief that the size and quantity of numbers are responsible for the diculty
of a maths problem (Garofalo, 1989; Lucangeli, Coi, & Bosco, 1997);
. the belief that there is just one correct way to solve problems and a solution for
any problem can be reached in just a few minutes (Lampert, 1990; Silver, 1985);
. the belief that it is not necessary to read the whole text of a problem since there
are keywords in the last sentence or in the question that indicate the operation
to be performed (Garofalo, 1989);
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 155

. the belief that doing maths means following the rules provided by the teacher,
and knowing maths means remembering and applying the rules correctly
(Lampert, 1990);
. the belief that the decision to check, or not to check what has been done should
be made on the basis of the time available (Garofalo, 1989);
. the belief that ordinary students cannot understand mathematics, but only mem-
orise and apply what they learn mechanically (Schoenfeld, 1992).

Regarding students beliefs about the self with respect to mathematics and math-
ematical learning, their perceived ability to solve maths problems, that is, their self-
ecacy beliefs in problem-solving have been ascertained (e.g. Kloosterman, 1988;
Kloosterman & Stage, 1992; Malmivuori & Pehkonen, 1997; Mason, 2003b). Other
beliefs about themselves as maths learners, in particular beliefs in the possibility of
increasing their own maths ability by working hard, and believing in the usefulness
of maths in everyday life, have all been assumed to be related to the motivation to
learn to solve mathematical problems (e.g. Kloosterman & Stage, 1992). These
motivational beliefs aect students emotional and aective responses in the vari-
ous mathematical situations (McLeod, 1992).
Particularly important in examining students beliefs in this domain is the inten-
sive and systematic work by Belgian and Northern Ireland research teams on
learning and teaching maths word problems (Verschael, Greer, & De Corte,
2000). A series of studies have been carried out over the past few years about what
Schoenfeld (1991) called the suspension of sense-making within the culture of
mainstream mathematics education. This phenomenon becomes evident when stu-
dents are faced with two special types of word problem, which have been con-
sidered in our empirical study. The rst is exemplied by the following absurd
problem, used in 1980 by a researcher in Grenoble with rst and second graders,
and then replicated on a wider scale in Germany by Radatz (quoted in Verschael
et al., 2000) and Switzerland by Reusser (1988): There are 26 sheep and 10 goats
on a ship. How old is the captain?. It was found that a great majority of students
at dierent school levels provided a numerical answer, resulting from a combi-
nation of the two numbers. They tended not to recognise the meaninglessness of
the problem itself and their solutions.
The second type of special problem is exemplied by the following, originally
used in the Third National Assessment of Educational Progress in the US (Carpenter,
Lindquist, Matthews, & Silver, 1983: An army bus holds 36 soldiers. If 1128 soldiers
are being bussed to their training site, how many buses are needed?.) This is quite a
simple division with remainders problem (31 and remainder of 12), but it requires
taking into account real-world knowledge to avoid non-whole-number answers or
rounding the outcome of the division to the nearest preceding whole-number. Of the
70% of students who carried out the division correctly in the US assessment, only
quite a small percentage, 23%, gave the realistic answer, 32 buses, while 19% said 31
buses, and 29% gave the answer as 31 with a remainder of 12.
De Corte and collaborators (De Corte & Verschael, 1989; De Corte, Verschael,
& Op t Eynde, 2000; Verschael, De Corte, & Lasure, 1994, 1999; Verschael et al.,
156 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

2000) used parallel versions of this problem in a systematic research on realistic

mathematical modelling. They demonstrated that upper primary school students
consider the choice of the operation to be computed as important, and do not apply
their common-sense knowledge or take into account the realistic context of a given
problem. Students strongly manifested their tendency to give single and precise
numerical answers to maths problems since they believed that those were the only
answers, as required by the established word problem schema constructed
through their experience of school mathematics. From this point of view, students
should not be considered as irrational or worse. Rather, their performance is con-
sistent with their socialisation in school practices (Wyndhamn & Saljo, 1997), or
socio-mathematical classroom norms applied to word problems (Cobb, Yachel, &
Wood, 1992), or the didactic contract operating in the classroom (Brousseau, 1990).

2. Rening students mathematical beliefs

Intervention studies about beliefs in the domain of mathematics, which try to

improve, and not only document the state of aairs, are still very scarce, at least to
our knowledge. In this regard, it should be pointed out that studies on the new
approach to mathematics education in authentic and meaningful learning environ-
ments (e.g. Cobb & Yachel, 1998; Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt,
1997; Verschael et al., 2000) have pointed out the positive inuence on students
views about the discipline. However, these investigations do not specically address
learners change in mathematical beliefs. On this theme, we can refer only to
research by Higgins (1997) and De Corte and his associates (De Corte et al., 2000,
2002) who explored the possibility of nurturing appropriate beliefs in novel power-
ful classroom environments.
Higgins (1997) examined the eects of one-years instruction on middle school
students beliefs about problem-solving and mathematics. Over the school year the
experimental class teachers taught heuristic problem-solving skills and introduced
challenging open problems through instructional practices such as small-group
discussions and guided discovery. At the end of the intervention, the group of stu-
dents who received problem-solving instruction revealed more sophisticated
beliefsmeasured by means of a questionnairethan students who had traditional
instruction. Experimental group students did not view maths only in terms of
memorising facts and procedures and had more advanced denitions of mathemat-
ical understanding. They believed more that common sense should be used to solve
real problems and that answers to teachers questions require thinking hard. In
addition, they had a greater perception of the usefulness of maths. Nevertheless, a
side eect was also found. Experimental group students revealed a tendency to
believe that the heuristics learned could solve all problems.
Verschael et al. (1999) carried out a study in which they examined how a parti-
cular belief changed in fth grade pupils, that is, the belief about the role of real-
world knowledge in mathematical modelling and problem-solving. This change was
investigated mainly indirectly by comparing the problem-solving performances of
an experimental and a control group before and after the experimentation of ve
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 157

teaching/learning units in the former group. Improvement in mathematical model-

ling and problem-solving performance was found in the experimental group only.
Beliefs about mathematical word problem-solving were also directly ascertained in
another study by means of a questionnaire (De Corte et al., 2000; Verschael et al.,
2000). A signicant renement of beliefs as well as problem-solving performance
emerged from the questionnaire, but only for the group who participated in the
experimental treatment, that is, a series of 20 lessons on mathematical problem
modelling and solving carried out to establish a new climate and mathematical
classroom culture. However, the signicance of this eect of belief improvement
was small.

3. Purposes, research questions and hypotheses of the study

The intervention study introduced below is situated in the theoretical context of

research on students beliefs about mathematics and how they could be rened in
the classroom. The rst purpose of the study was to ascertain a wide set of math-
ematics-related beliefs in fth graders, that is, students younger than those involved
in most previous studies, mainly aimed at identifying beliefs only. As underlined by
Buehl and Alexander (2001), the empirical investigation of beliefs about knowledge
and knowing has to overcome some obstacles mainly related to the fact that indivi-
duals may hold these assumptions tacitly, with no explicit awareness. Thus, they
may not be easily and fully articulated in words, specially with young students.
However, when some carefully formulated items or questions are posed about the
nature and acquisition of knowledge in the domain, they can provide an avenue for
individuals mathematics-related beliefs to surface. As in almost all previous stu-
dies, a self-report questionnaire on various aspects of beliefs about maths, math-
ematical problem-solving, and learning maths was prepared as an appropriate
instrument for identifying the dimensions which underlie fth graders beliefs in
this domain. As fundamental assumptions that underlie the way students approach
the discipline, these beliefs were supposed to aect problem-solving performance in
maths.
The second purpose of the study was to implement an intervention in the real
and complex context of the classroom, primarily focused on the development of
beliefs by changing the traditional learning environment. In previous experimental
design, the primary focus of the intervention was mostly on achievement, and only
secondarily on beliefs. The main focus on the renement of beliefs would at the
same time concern an improvement in students problem-solving performance.
Thus, the two main research questions were the following: Can students math-
ematics-related beliefs be developed through an educational intervention in an
innovative learning environment? In other words, can students beliefs be rened
by changing the context in which maths is learned? and Can students problem-
solving performance in usual and unusual mathematical word problems also be
improved through the educational intervention?
Based on the above-mentioned literature (Higgins, 1997; Verschael et al., 1999,
2000), the general hypothesis was that in an appropriate classroom climate
158 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

students at the end of elementary school could rene their mathematics-related

beliefs. Since these beliefs aect problem-solving performance, as previous research
has pointed out (e.g. Schoenfeld, 1989, 1992), their performance in solving dierent
types of problems would also benet from the novel classroom learning context.
Thus, for research question 1 it was expected that the innovative educational inter-
vention would contribute towards helping students construct more advanced and
productive beliefs about maths. Assuming that maths beliefs are related to prob-
lem-solving performance, for research question 2 it was predicted that through the
innovative educational intervention students would also show a greater improve-
ment in their skills in solving usual and non-usual mathematical word problems.
The third purpose of the study was to see whether the innovative learning
environment would also aect students perceptions of their own eort and under-
standing in maths. Thus, the third research question was: Can students self-evalu-
ation of their own eort and understanding in maths also be improved through the
educational intervention?
It was predicted that students in the novel learning environment would perceive
themselves to be more engaged in maths as well as understanding it better than
students in the traditional teaching environment. The former would become more
motivated to learn maths by stimulating their aective response in the various
situations and giving a sense of better understanding of the subject-matter.
The fourth purpose of the study was to examine if, and to what extent, students
beliefs contributed to their achievement in the domain. Thus, the fourth research
question was: Do students beliefs predict their achievement in maths?
It was hypothesised that maths beliefs would signicantly contribute to students
achievement in maths. In sum, the main hypothesis was that a substantially modi-
ed learning environment would facilitate students development of their own con-
victions about maths. Giving students opportunities to deal with, and reect on,
the nature of various mathematical word problems, would also help them increase
their problem-solving performance. Supported by rened beliefs, it would not be
characterised by the tendency to reduce word problem-solving to selecting the sup-
posed correct arithmetical operation using the numbers given in the problem.
Rather, problem-solving performance would reect the tendency to take into
account the nature and context of the problem. In addition, more adaptive and
productive beliefs, as well as an improved problem-solving performance in the novel
learning environment, would also be reected in greater student self-evaluation of
their own eort and understanding in maths.
Finally, the last purpose of the study was to see whether the students in the inno-
vative learning environment perceived that they changed their beliefs about maths.

4. Method

4.1. Participants

Eighty-six fth graders, 46 boys and 40 girls, attending a public elementary

school in the Milan area (Northern Italy) were involved in the study. They were
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 159

Caucasian and shared a homogeneous middle class social background. The group
who took part in the innovative educational intervention was made up of two
entire classes. The same teacher was teaching maths in these classes prior to the
study. This group comprised 40 students (26 boys and 14 girls). The group that did
not receive the innovative educational intervention but the usual maths teaching
was also made up of two entire classes. Another teacher was teaching maths in
these classes and continued to teach regularly during the study. This group com-
prised 46 students (20 boys and 26 girls). The two groups were randomly assigned
to the two conditions.

4.2. Educational intervention: changing the learning environment

The educational intervention in maths classes was carefully designed by the

authors and the regular class teacher in a number of meetings. It was implemented
in the classroom in a series of 12 sessions by the second author, who has a long
experience of mathematics teaching in elementary and middle school. The class tea-
cher did not implement the innovative intervention herself because she did not feel
fully ready for the substantial innovation, although she had just completed reason-
ably long in-service teacher training on classroom learning environments and their
relationship with students views of maths and performance in the domain. She
was enthusiastic about the opportunity of co-operation with the university
researcher who could model her the appropriate teaching style and actions in the
real situation of the maths class as a sort of apprenticeship.
The lessons, of one and a half hours, took place weekly over a period of three
months, in the presence of the teacher who intervened as facilitator when needed.
For example, she mainly referred to and reminded students of previous classroom
work which was connected with what they were doing. The intervention was aimed
at improving students beliefs about maths by creating a powerful maths learning
environment whose climate was intended to be conducive to the renement of
nave and maladaptive convictions. Based on ndings from seminal research in the
eld (e.g. Cobb et al., 1992; Schoenfeld, 1992; Sfard, 1998; Verschael et al., 2000),
this learning environment had the following characteristics.
(a) The rst basic attempt was to establish a dierent classroom culture through
the negotiation of new socio-mathematical norms regarding the following.
The students role in the classroom. They were systematically encouraged to do
maths, that is, to approach the school subject-matter based on the conviction that
they are able to deeply understand its mechanisms, generate alternative solutions
to a given problem, and evaluate them in the light of the solutions put forward by
the class community. Students were gradually asked to take responsibility for their
own understanding.
The instructors role in the classroom. She stimulated, encouraged and scaolded
the students to engage in cognitive and metacognitive activities that characterise
the model of competent mathematical problem-solving underlying the learning
environment described by Verschael et al., (2000), to which we referred. Both
types of activities were embedded in a ve-stage overall strategy involving a set of
160 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

eight heuristics, particularly in the rst two stages. The ve steps and eight heur-
istics are the following (Verschael et al., 2000: p. 97).

1. A mental representation of the problem should be constructed. The heuristics of

this stage are:

draw a picture;
make a list of elements, a table, or a scheme;
identify relevant and irrelevant data;
take into account your real-word knowledge.
2. A decision should be made about how to solve the problem. The heuristics of
this stage are:

make a owchart;
guess and check;
look for a pattern;
simplify the numbers.
3. The necessary calculations should be computed.
4. Outcomes should be interpreted and an answer given.
5. The solution should be evaluated.

The implementation of these steps and heuristics by the students involved not
only cognitive but also metacognitive activities as the overall strategy required both
metaknowledge and self-regulatory skills. In other words, students were stimulated
to be aware of the importance and usefulness of the dierent steps and heuristics,
as well as to reect upon their cognitive activities and to self-regulate them while
implementing the strategy for meaningful mathematical learning. As support, stu-
dents were encouraged to ask themselves the following questions in the various
steps of the overall strategy (Schoenfeld, 1992): What do I know?, What do I
want to nd?, Am I using the strategies I have learned?, Should I try another
strategy?, Does my answer make sense?. The instructor withdrew support and
scaolds as the students became more competent and more in charge of their own
maths learning and problem-solving.
What counts as a good mathematical problem, a good solution procedure, and a
good answer. Students were encouraged to understand that many problems can be
interpreted and solved in dierent ways, that solution procedures should not be
applied mechanically, that the right answer is not enough when one does not
understand what lies behind it.
(b) The second basic attempt was to establish and support the class maths com-
munity by promoting and encouraging socio-cognitive interaction between students
through small-group assignments and discussions, as well as whole-class discus-
sions. Each session included small-group assignments and discussions in xed
heterogeneous groups of three or four students. A whole-class discussion followed.
Individual assignments were also followed by whole-class discussion. For instance,
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 161

if small-group assignments and discussions regarded nding the dierent ways a

given problem could be correctly solved, the whole-class discussion served to com-
pare and evaluate all the various solution paths and activities emerging from the
groups. Also when followed by individual assignments, whole-class discussions
were mostly devoted to the articulation and evaluation of problem-solving proce-
dures and activities.
(c) The third basic attempt was to introduce a series of non-routine problem
situations, such as realistic and unsolvable problems, and indeterminate and
equivocal problems alongside standard word problems. Students were confronted
with problems that allow multiple representations, alternative situational models,
various solution paths, and dierent answers, as well as problems that require
realistic mathematical modelling by using adequate real-world knowledge and
avoiding stereotyped solutions derived from the application of acquired proce-
dures. The aim was to stimulate learners to think about the nature of the problem
and pay attention to the structure and not only surface details. Thinking about the
nature of a maths problem could involve students on the epistemic level of cog-
nition, the third level after the cognitive and metacognitive, according to Kitchener
(1983) three-level model of cognitive processing.
During the intervention, the children in the traditional teaching classes followed
the regular mathematics program, which also included a considerable number of
lessons devoted to traditional word maths problem-solving. In particular, the stu-
dents in these classes dealt with routine word problems, traditionally the subject of
examinations at the end of fth grade, that is, about arithmetic (e.g. calculate
costs, proceeds and gains) and geometry (e.g. working out the area of planes and
solid gures). They were also involved in practising calculus in the four operations,
especially with decimal numbers.
The second author was also in the traditional teaching classrooms for several
sessions to see that teaching was taking place as usual. The authors presence was
justied to the children by explaining that she wished to see how fth graders do
mathematics. Given the complexity of the factors involved in teaching the two
groups in the real life context of their classrooms, it is obviously not possible to
maintain that all variables of the two conditions were perfectly under control.
However, we did try to control as many variables as possible. Moreover, we can
state that there were not more mathematical concepts introduced in the innovative
learning environment. Instead, at least for three months, the culture and learning
practices (i.e. types of problem, teaching methods, students role) in the maths clas-
ses were dierent in the two groups, according to the features of the innovative
classroom learning environment created by the researcher in co-operation with the
teacher, as described above.
4.3. Measures

4.3.1. Beliefs questionnaire

The self-report questionnaire used in the study referred to two of the three main
categories of students convictions in the domain that has been identied by
162 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

De Corte et al. (2002), that is, (1) beliefs about mathematics, mathematical learn-
ing and problem-solving, and (2) beliefs about the self in relation to mathematics.
In particular, the instrument was prepared by the authors on the basis of other
questionnaires intended to measure beliefs in students of higher school levels. It
was partially based on an Italian version of the Indiana Mathematics Belief Scale
by Kloosterman and Stage (1992: p. 115). This is a self-report questionnaire com-
prising ve original scales regarding the two above-mentioned belief categories and
a scale (six items) taken from the FennemaSherman Usefulness Scale. Since both
instruments were used with high school students, we only took into account items
that could be introduced to fth graders, after reformulation. We also added other
aspects regarding beliefs that are not present in those questionnaires and empha-
sised some of those taken from the previous instruments. Our questionnaire com-
prised 28 items to be rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale (ranging from 1 totally
disagree to 5 totally agree), aimed at measuring students beliefs about the two
above-mentioned categories. Items regarding beliefs in the rst category, that is,
about mathematics, mathematical learning and problem-solving, were dierentiated
into items about:

understanding in mathematical learning and problem-solving (e.g. It is not

important to understand a maths problem but it is important to solve it; six
items);
problem-solving procedures (e.g. There is only one way to solve a maths prob-
lem; six items);
usefulness of maths (e.g. Maths helps me think more clearly when I study other
subjects; ve items).

Items regarding the beliefs of the second category, that is, about the self in
relation to mathematics, were dierentiated into items about:

ones perceived ability to solve time-consuming maths problems (e.g. Maths

problems that take a long time, do not bother me; ve items);
eort can increase ability in maths (e.g. I can get smarter in maths by working
hard; six items).

Therefore, on the basis of the recent literature and, in particular, the previous
questionnaires considered for the preparation of our instrument, two underlying
belief dimensions could be expected. One could comprise beliefs about mathemat-
ics as a discipline and the other beliefs about themselves as mathematics learners.
From a nave belief perspective there were items with a positive valence (e.g. I
dont take great care to understand a problem, as long as I give the answer) and
items with a negative valence (e.g. There are maths problems that have more than
one solution). This instrument was rened through a pilot study with a fth grade
class of a dierent school, which aimed at verifying the comprehensibility and
meaningfulness of items by children of the same age as those involved in the study.
The original instrument, included two more items, one regarding the rst category
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 163

of beliefs and one the second. These items were removed since they were unclear or
ambiguous. Some other items were reformulated to improve their comprehensi-
bility.
The instrument was administered to both groups as pre-test before the edu-
cational intervention, and post-test after.
4.3.2. Problem-solving
Two types of word problems were introduced to both groups of students as pre-
and post-test tasks in parallel versions: usual and unusual.

4.3.3. Usual word problems

There were two usual problems. Their level of diculty was supposed to be
adequate for all fth graders, since they are typically found in previous grades. A
usual problem for fth grade was also given at post-test only. It could not be given
as a pre-test task at the beginning of the school year (October), together with the
others, since it required calculus of fractions, which were to be taught during the
rst term.
4.3.4. Unusual word problems
The unusual problems diered from the common school problems, and were
used to assess students sense-making in school mathematics. There were two
unusual problems: an unsolvable, absurd problem and a realistic one. The
absurd problem was a parallel version of the unsolvable one introduced above,
that is: In a classroom there are four rows with seven desks each. How old is the
teacher?. In this case the students were required to note the meaninglessness of
the problem and avoid combining the numbers in the problem to produce an
answer.
The realistic problem was taken from the systematic research by De Corte and
his associates, as introduced above: There are 450 soldiers who must go to their
training site by bus. Each army bus holds 36 soldiers. How many buses are nee-
ded?. This problema simple division with remaindersrequires taking real-
world knowledge into account to avoid giving non whole-number answers or
rounding the outcome of the division to the nearest preceding whole-number.
Two tasks were given to both groups as post-test only to investigate further
some questions which emerged as interesting points needing examination, although
the absence of a pre-test meant that it was not possible to relate dierences
between the groups to the teaching experiment. One task gave three open-ended
questions which asked: what a student has to do to understand a maths problem;
whether fantasy and imagination are involved in solving maths problems; and whe-
ther entering into reality and pretending to be the protagonist of a maths problem
helps to understand it better. The other task, taken from a study by Zan and Poli
(1996), asked students to choose which of four problems was impossible. The
rst of the four was a normal subtraction problem with the subtrahend smaller
than the minuend. The second was a usual multiplication problem. The third was a
parallel version of the absurd problem, the only unsolvable one. The fourth
was another usual subtraction problem with numbers that were not plausible
164 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

(e.g. A man with 1700 teeth had 700 teeth pulled out by a dentist. How many
teeth has he got now?).
In addition, only the students in the innovative learning environment were asked
to write a note to indicate if they had changed their beliefs about maths by doing
maths and, if so, what beliefs: Do you think that you have changed your convic-
tion(s) by doing maths?. If so, what conviction(s)?.

4.3.5. Self-evaluations
Pre- and post-tests also asked students to self-evaluate their own eort on a 5-
point Likert-type scale: My eort in mathematics is. . . (ranging from 1
very low to 5 very high) and understanding: I understand maths... (ranging
from 1 very little to 5 very well).
In the pre- and post-test, the tasks were given in the following order. In the rst
session, about half an hour, students completed the beliefs questionnaire and
expressed their self-evaluations about eort and understanding in maths. In the
second, which took 5060 min, they solved the usual and unusual maths problems
(and answered the open-ended question in the post-test).

4.4. Data scoring and analysis

4.4.1. Beliefs questionnaire

Dimensions underlying the questionnaire were examined through the Rasch
model of unidimensional measurement (Bond & Fox, 2001) by using the RUMM
2010 (Rasch Unidimensional Measurement Models) statistical software.

4.4.2. Problem-solving
Answers to the usual word problems were coded in the following way: 0 point
was given to a wrong solution; 1 point to an only partially correct solution; 2
points to a correct solution (solutions to a problem could also be given 3 points if
there were inferences: i.e. 60 min means an hour, so 12 h and 60 min means 13 h).
A sum score was computed for performance in usual problem-solving.
Answers to the unusual absurd problem were coded in the following way:

0 point for giving the answer by adding the two given numbers, that is, the
answer 11 as the result of 7 4;
1 point for giving the answer by multiplying the two given numbers, that is, the
answer 28 as the result of 7  4, accompanied by a comment such as The
problem is easy;
2 points for the answer 28 accompanied by a comment such as What does it
mean?; What has the question to do with it?;
3 points when the problem was not solved and accompanied by a comment such
as: It is impossible to solve this problem; It is too strange; This is not a
problem.
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 165

In accordance with Verschael et al. (1994), answers to the problem requiring a

realistic solution were coded in the following way:

0 point for non-realistic answers and those due to operations dierent from
division or errors in calculation;
1 point for expected unrealistic answers but with realistic comments;
2 points for realistic answers;
3 points for realistic answers with realistic comments.
4.4.3. Post-test only tasks
Answers to the question about how to understand a problem were divided into
three categories according to the level of sophistication. The rst category com-
prised answers that referred only to vague actions that were not specied in their
purpose (e.g. to read the text) or actions focusing on the practical aspects of a
problem-solving procedure, which are usually carried out with no reection on the
nature of the problem and how to proceed to the solution (e.g. to write the data;
to do calculus). To the rst category, 1 point was attributed. The second category
comprised answers that referred the need to understanding the problematic situ-
ation or the decision on how to solve it (e.g. to seek the answer, to see where it is
and what it asks; to make the numbers simpler). To the second category, 2
points were attributed. The third category comprised answers that referred to a
higher level of reection on the nature of the problem to be solved, which goes
beyond the given data by looking for hidden information, formulating and evaluat-
ing solution hypotheses, or identifying an interpretative model of the problematic
situation (e.g. to look for hidden data; to nd a model to interpret it; to make
a hypothesis and see if it works). To the third category, 3 points were attributed.
Answers to the three open-ended questions about the use of fantasy and imagin-
ation, and the reference to real life were scored 0 or 1. A global score was com-
puted for each student by adding the scores of the answers to the three questions.
Answers to the task asking to choose which of four problems was impossible
was scored 1 when students chose the unsolvable problem and 0 when they chose
any of the other three.
All coding of the solutions was reviewed by an independent judge, a researcher
in educational psychology, who checked whether any errors had been made. No
errors were found. She also reviewed the open-ended answers. Agreement between
our coding and the judges was very high (98%). Disagreements regarded only
answers to the question about problem-solving strategies and were quite easily
resolved through discussion between the authors and the judge.
Data from the written notes underwent a qualitative analysis to identify the dif-
ferent specic beliefs that students recognised as having changed. This analysis was
also made by the authors and by an independent judge. There was no disagreement
between them.
4.4.4. Self-evaluations
Scores for students self-evaluation of their own eort and understanding in
mathematics were the sum of the rates of the 5-point Likert-type scale.
166 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

4.4.5. Maths achievement

Data on students achievements in maths were the teachers evaluations, on a 5-
point scale, as they appeared in assessment records (1 optimum; 2 good;
3 fair; 4 sufficient; 5 insufficient) at the end of the rst four-month period
of the school year (two weeks after the end of the educational intervention).
Pearsons correlations were calculated to see the initial associations between stu-
dents beliefs about maths, both types of problem-solving performance, and self-
evaluations of eort and understanding in maths. A MANCOVA for all pre- and
post-test dependent variables was then performed with group as the between-sub-
ject variable, the measures at the post-test as dependent variables (rst belief
dimension, second belief dimension, usual problem-solving, absurd problem,
realistic problem, self-evaluation of own eort and self-evaluation of own under-
standing in maths) and the measures at the pre-test as covariates. A MANOVA
was performed for the post-test only measures with group as the between-subject
variable. Moreover, regression analyses were computed to examine the contri-
bution in both groups of students beliefs about maths and themselves as maths
learners to their achievement in maths. Students scores in both dimensions were
used as predictors and teachers evaluations as the outcome measure.

5. Results

5.1. Beliefs questionnaire

From the Rasch model of unidimensional analysis, two expected belief dimen-
sions emerged:

. beliefs about themselves as maths learners;

. beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solving.

Items regarding the ability to solve time-consuming maths problems and innate
ability and eort in mathematical ability belong to the rst dimension. Items
regarding understanding in problem-solving, problem-solving procedures, and use-
fulness of maths belong to the second dimension.
For the dimension of beliefs about themselves as maths learners, the power of
test-of-t was good, based on a separation index of 0.73. A Rasch analysis revealed
that all nine items t the Rasch-modelled expectation model with good degrees of
matching. The t statistics for the itemtrait interaction were: total item
chi2 19:67, degree of freedom 18, total chi2 probability 0:35, separation
index 0:73, Cronbachs alpha 0:56.
For the dimension of beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solving, the
test-of-t power was reasonable, based on a separation index of 0.58. The Rasch
analysis revealed that two items should be removed for their unacceptable values
of match with the modelled expectations since in the individual item-t their prob-
ability was less than 0.01. The degree of match between the remaining 17 items and
the Rasch-modelled expectations was good or reasonable. The t statistics for the
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 167

itemtrait interaction were: total item chi2 43:177, degrees of freedom 38, total
chi2 probability 0:26, separation index 0:58, Cronbachs alpha 0:56.
Scores in each belief dimension were the sum of the rates of the items that tted
the model.

5.1.1. Initial beliefs and problem-solving performance

Students initial beliefs about themselves as maths learners and about maths and
mathematical problem-solving correlated signicantly positively, although moder-
ately, with their performance in the usual word problems. By contrast, the two
dimensions of initial beliefs were not correlated with performance in unusual word
problems (neither in the unsolvable nor the realistic problem), which was very low
for all participants.

5.1.2. Initial beliefs and self-evaluations

Students initial beliefs about themselves as maths learners and about maths and
mathematical problem-solving were also signicantly correlated to a higher extent
to self-evaluation of their eort and understanding in mathematics. These correla-
tions are introduced in Table 1.
It should be noted that t-tests performed on the scores in all pre-test measures
revealed that there were no dierences between the two groups for any measure
before implementing the educational intervention.
The MANCOVA revealed the main eects of group, F 7; 71 14:15,
p < 0:001, g2 0:58, on the dependent variables. Results from the univariate tests
are summarised separately for each dependent variable. Means and standard devi-
ation of scores in all the pre- and post-test measures are introduced in Table 2.

5.1.3. Beliefs about themselves as maths learners

The univariate tests revealed a signicant correlation of a covariate, that is, the
initial scores in this rst dimension with the post-test scores, F 1; 77 30:75,
p < 0:001, g2 0:28, as well as the eect of group. The group in the innovative

Table 1
Intercorrelations between the two maths belief dimensions, problem-solving performance, and self-
evaluations at the pre-test
Beliefs about Beliefs about maths
themselves as maths and mathematical
learners problem-solving
Beliefs about themselves as maths learners 0.40


Beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solving 0.40


Usual problem-solving 0.26
0.21


Unusual unsolvable problem 0.07 0.01
Unusual realistic problem 0.04 0.12
Self-evaluation of own eort 0.30

0.23

Self-evaluation of own understanding 0.49

0.42




= p < 0:05:



= p < 0:01:
168 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

Table 2
Means and standard deviations of the two groups in all the dependant variables at pre- and post-test
Pre-test Post-test
Innovative Traditional Innovative Traditional
learning learning learning learning
environment environment environment environment
M SD M SD M SD M SD
Beliefs about themselves as 36.50 6.44 36.30 5.24 41.30 3.15 38.60 5.10
maths learners
Beliefs about maths and math- 67.92 8.21 65.17 7.56 81.05 5.05 69.67 6.40
ematical problem-solving
Usual problem-solving 3.47 1.94 3.54 1.83 4.35 1.78 3.59 1.89
Unusual unsolvable problem 1.87 1.30 1.95 1.07 2.32 0.88 1.84 0.89
Unusual realistic problem 0.12 0.40 0.13 0.34 0.77 1.22 0.17 0.67
Self-evaluation of own eort in 3.83 0.96 3.85 0.79 4.02 0.80 3.54 0.86
maths
Self-evaluation of own under- 2.14 0.95 2.18 0.84 2.27 0.79 1.86 0.98
standing in maths

learning environment had more advanced beliefs about themselves as math learners
than the traditional learning environment group, F 1; 77 10:69, p < 0:01,
g2 0:12.
5.1.4. Beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solving
A signicant eect of a covariate emerged, that is, the initial scores in this
second belief dimension correlated with the post-test scores, F 1; 77 5:94,
p < 0:05, g2 0:07. The univariate tests also revealed a signicant eect of group.
Students who received innovative teaching held more sophisticated beliefs about
maths and mathematical problem-solving, F 1; 77 87:29, p < 0:001, g2 0:53.
As can be seen in Table 2, the standard deviation of scores decreased remarkably
for students who underwent the teaching experiment, but did not in the traditional
teaching group. This indicates that those students performed less dierently within
their group at the end of the educational intervention.
5.1.5. Usual word problems
Data show that students performance in usual problem-solving at the pre-test,
that is, the covariate signicantly correlated with their performance at the post-test
when solving standard maths problems, F 1; 77 32:10, p < 0:001, g2 0:29.
Group also dierentiated students performance by favouring those in the novel
learning environment, F 1; 77 5:95, p < 0:05, g2 0:07. Table 2 shows that
only standard deviations of the scores for this group decreased slightly over time.
It indicates that their problem-solving skills were less diversied at the post-test.
5.1.6. Unusual word problems
Univariate tests regarding the unsolvable problem again showed a signicant
eect of a covariate, that is, the scores at the pre-test for the absurd problem
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 169

correlated with the scores at the post-test, F 1; 77 6:27, p < 0:05, g2 0:07, as
well as a signicant dierence related to group. Students in the innovative learning
environment were better able to recognise the particular nature of the problem and
reached signicantly higher scores than students in the traditional learning environ-
ment, whose scores decreased slightly, F 1; 77 6:86, p < 0:05, g2 0:08.
Univariate tests show the signicant eect of group for the problem requiring a
realistic solution. Students who received innovative teaching outperformed those in
the traditional classes, F 1; 77 7:19, p < 0:01, g2 0:08, although the overall
score was still relatively low. The high standard deviation of scores in the innova-
tive teaching group indicates the presence of opposite level answers.
Unlike the pre-test, students performance in solving unusual problems in the
post-test signicantly correlated positively, although moderately, with the two
belief dimensions. More precisely, performance in the unsolvable problem corre-
lated to the same extent with both types of beliefs (r 0:23, p < 0:05). Perform-
ance in the problem requiring a realistic solution correlated dierently with beliefs
about themselves as maths learners (r 0:28, p < 0:05) and with beliefs about
maths and mathematical problem-solving (r 0:20, p < 0:05).

5.1.7. Self-evaluations
For both the self-evaluation of eort and understanding in maths, the univariate
tests revealed a signicant eect of group. Students who had regular teaching per-
ceived their own eort, F 1; 77 8:77, p < 0:01, g2 0:10, and understanding,
F 1; 77 4:59, p < 0:05, g2 0:10, in maths at the post-test signicantly lower
than those who beneted from the innovative educational intervention.

5.1.8. Post-test only tasks

A MANOVA revealed the main eect of group, F 3; 82 16:05, p < 0:001,
g2 0:37. For the usual problem given as post-test only, since it was not appropri-
ate to the level at the beginning of fth grade, a univariate test revealed that the
group in the novel learning environment (M 2:05, SD 1:05) outperformed the
traditional environment group (M 1:32, SD 1:33) by giving more correct solu-
tions, F 1; 84 8:11, p < 0:01, g2 0:08. In addition, students who participated
in the innovative intervention (M 2:47, SD 1:35) gave more advanced answers
to the open questions than those who followed regular instruction (M 0:89,
SD 0:94) as it emerged from the univariate test, F 1; 84 40:09, p < 0:001,
g2 0:32. For the task which asked to choose which of four word problems were
impossible to solve, the students of the innovative teaching group (M 0:60,
SD 0:49) seemed to understand the nature of the problems better and indicated
the unsolvable problem more correctly than those of the traditional teaching group
(M 0:26, SD 0:44) as the univariate test revealed, F 1; 84 11:19,
p 0:001, g2 0:11. Since there were no dierences between groups in the pre-test,
but only in the post-tests, it is plausible that the dierences found in the measures
which were presented at the end of the intervention only were due to the edu-
cational treatment rather than to group dierences found after instruction.
170 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

5.1.9. Contribution of maths beliefs to achievement in maths

A correlation analysis indicates that the more students held advanced beliefs
about maths and mathematical problem-solving (r 0:42, p < 0:001) and about
themselves as maths learners (r 0:41, p < 0:001), the better their achievement in
maths. From an overall stepwise regression analysis it emerged that the two-pre-
dictor model yielded a multiple correlation coecient of 0.50, F 2; 83 13; 835,
p < 0:001, accounting for 25% (23% adjusted) of the variance in maths achieve-
ment. However, the amount of variance explained in this regression analysis could
be an artefact related to the experimental condition factor, given that the stu-
dents in the innovative learning environment rened their beliefs to a greater
extent and improved their problem-solving performance. Thus, for a ner analysis
concerning the contribution of maths beliefs, two separate regression analyses were
carried out, one for the innovative teaching group and the other for the tra-
ditional. Both dimensions of beliefs, that is, beliefs about themselves as math lear-
ners (b 0:44, p < 0:01) and beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-
solving (b 0:29, p < 0:05) were predictors of achievement in maths for the stu-
dents who participated in the novel learning environment. The two predictors yiel-
ded a multiple correlation coecient of 0.63, F 2; 37 12:22, p < 0:001,
accounting for 39% of the variance (36% adjusted) in maths achievement. For the
students who received traditional instruction, only the dimension of beliefs about
maths and mathematical problem-solving was a predictor (b 0:33, p < 0:05),
with a correlation coecient of 0.33, F 1; 44 5:55, p < 0:05, accounting for
11% of the variance (9% adjusted) in maths achievement. The other dimension,
that is, beliefs about themselves as learners, with a partial correlation of 0.12, were
removed.
5.1.10. Qualitative analysis
Three students who beneted from the innovative intervention were not present
when they were asked to write notes to indicate whether they had changed beliefs
at the end of the educational intervention. Thus, the qualitative analysis con-
cerned 37 notes. A written note could express the change of more than one belief.
In 35 of the 37 notes, there was reference to something that students perceived
they had changed in their representations. The changed beliefs included the fol-
lowing.
Change in beliefs about the nature of a problem, and how to solve it, was repor-
ted in 22 notes, as in these two examples.
The idea I have changed is about problem-solving because now I believe that
there are also problems with more than one solution, that is an idea that had
never crossed my mind before. I have also seen that there are unsolvable and
absurd problems. (Malvina)
Now I believe that if a problem seems dicult you can follow the good
problem solver and do what it says, so you can think you are part of the
problem, imagine the real situation. (Mattia)
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 171

Change in beliefs about the data of a problem was pointed out in 17 notes, as in
the case of Margherita and Marco:
I have changed my idea that all the given data are not always to be used for
the operation. I have also realised that maths is useful for solving problems.
(Margherita)
The idea that has changed most is the idea about the data of a problem. They
should be considered all together, not one at a time. The thing that made me
change my old idea was that one day I was trying to solve a problem and I
could not work it out. Then I tried considering it all together and the solution
came out. For the dicult problems my idea now is that we have to imagine
ourselves inside the story of the problem and think of it calmly. (Marco)
Change in the belief about the value of hard work in maths was expressed in 12
notes by students who perceived themselves as more condent in hard work to
nd a solution for the maths problems. The next examples illustrate this percep-
tion.
If you do not understand the meaning of a problem, you should not loose
heart but try and try to gure out it. To solve a problem you have to express
dierent possible opinions since any opinion could be the right one. (Matteo)
Before I used to avoid dicult problems but now I realise that dicult pro-
blems can also be solved. Only the impossible problems, the absurd, do not
have any solution. (Simone)

6. Discussion and conclusions

The initial purpose of this intervention study was to measure maths beliefs using
a self-report questionnaire in students younger than those involved in most of the
previous studies. A Rasch model analysis indicated the two dimensions around
which a set of maths beliefs in fth graders may be structured. The 28-item ques-
tionnaire appeared to be quite a useful instrument, although some items need
further attention, specially those characterising the second belief dimension. The
reliability of both dimensions, although rather low, was within an acceptable range
as argued in the literature about psychometric properties of scales developed for
research purposes (Nunnally, 1978). However, the questionnaire should be rened
and applied to larger samples to test its application more widely and contribute to
improving its construct validity. It should also be pointed out that more exible
tools, such as interviews, could integrate ascertaining this kind of conviction to
allow a more accurate picture of what students believe about the discipline of
maths and learning in the domain.
The second purpose of the study was to test the eectiveness of the educational
intervention, implemented in the novel classroom learning environment, to develop
172 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

students mathematical beliefs as well as their problem-solving performance. Our

hypothesis has been supported by MANCOVA. Students who received innovative
instruction showed more advanced beliefs in both dimensions at the end of the
intervention than those who received traditional instruction. This indicates that the
novel classroom environment where students face non-traditional and open chal-
lenging problems, reect on their nature and discuss the dierent strategies that
could be adopted to solve them, had a positive impact on their mathematical
beliefs. Moreover, as hypothesised, doing maths in the powerful learning environ-
ment helped learners improve their problem-solving skills more. Students who ben-
eted from it, solved the usual problems more correctly than those in the
traditional environment at the end of the educational intervention. The former also
improved their performance in unusual problem-solving, that is, when confronted
with an unsolvable problem or one requiring a realistic solution.
Moreover, post-test performances in solving unusual problems were also corre-
lated, although moderately, with both beliefs about themselves as maths learners
and beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solving. While performances in
these problems were also very low in the pre-test for students who scored higher in
the questionnaire, in the post-test the more advanced the students beliefs, the bet-
ter they solved non-routine problems. It can be argued that the renement of
maths beliefs over the three months, which emerged more strongly in the innova-
tive learning environment, helped students who held more appropriate representa-
tions about maths as a discipline and themselves as maths learners, to recognise the
particular nature of the absurd and realistic problems. In addition, these stu-
dents produced answers of a higher level to the open-ended questions. They also
identied the impossible problem more correctly.
The third objective of the study was to see whether students self-evaluation of
their eort and understanding in maths could also be improved through the edu-
cational intervention. Both the motivational and cognitive aspects were perceived
higher by the students in the innovative learning environment at post-test. These
learners perceived making a greater eort in maths at the end of the educational
intervention than the traditional teaching group, as well as a better understanding
in the domain.
The fourth purpose of the study was to see whether students maths beliefs con-
tribute to their achievement in maths. Data from regression analyses indicate that
for the innovative intervention students, both dimensions underlying the question-
naire used in this study contributed to it. In contrast, for the traditional teaching
group only the dimension of beliefs about maths and mathematical problem-solv-
ing was a predictor. We can speculate that the dimension of beliefs about them-
selves as maths learners, which did not predict achievement in the traditional
classes, is less stable than the dimension of beliefs about maths and mathematical
problem-solving since, to some extent, it can be more related to specic situations.
This may lead to a variation in beliefs about self-ecacy and the value of hard
work in maths. Students who beneted from the innovative learning environment
showed more adaptive and stable beliefs about themselves as maths learners than
those in the traditional environment. This question is worth investigating in greater
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 173

depth. However, data from regression analyses should not be interpreted in terms
of causal relationships. If two variables signicantly correlate, the existence of a
direct causal link between them is not implied. This means that to some extent the
beliefs identied in this study are associated with students achievement in maths
and contributed signicantly to it, especially for the students in the innovative
learning environment, but they are not to be considered as the cause of their
achievement in the domain.
The nal purpose of the study was to see whether the group who beneted from
the novel learning environment was aware of changes in their beliefs about maths.
The qualitative analysis of the written notes shows that almost all students expres-
sed a change in one belief, at least. These notes illustrate that their initial convic-
tions about some fundamental aspects of maths and mathematical problem-solving
were positively aected by what they did in the classroom.
Overall, the ndings provide evidence that the educational intervention, which
created the novel learning environment, produced positive outcomes in terms of
students beliefs, eort and problem-solving performance. In this regard however, a
limitation of the study is that the measure of problem-solving performance was
very restricted. A nal critical comment is that the educational intervention was
not carried out by the regular classroom teacher and this reduces the ecological
validity of the study to some extent. A better documentation of the possibility of
developing mathematics-related beliefs, problem-solving performance and engage-
ment requires that the intervention is implemented by regular teachers in collabor-
ation with researchers. In this light, it should be pointed out that teachers beliefs
and behaviour play an essential role as they can help or constrain students to
develop more advanced convictions about the nature and acquisition of knowledge
in maths (Verschael, De Corte, & Borghart, 1997).
Teachers wide inuence on students construction of their beliefs through the
ways in which they present subject-matter, type of tasks, assessment method, pro-
cedures, and criteria they use has been pointed out (Pehkonen, 1998; Pehkonen &
Torner, 1996; Torner, 1998). It is legitimate to speculate that the departure point in
modifying students nave beliefs about maths and mathematical problem is tea-
chers beliefs. Pre- and in-service teacher training should include activities aimed at
making them manifest, analyse, and reect on their own convictions about the
discipline and dierent ways in which maths can be approached in the classroom
(e.g. Franke, Fennema, & Carpenter, 1997). In the last decade some remarkable
changes in mathematical education have taken place in dierent countries for
worldwide reforms. Yet, a gap still exists between what is envisioned in ocial
documents or claimed by academic research on maths education and the practice
of maths education. Thus, it is necessary to go further to improve students math-
ematical performance by changing their beliefs about the domain, as well as those
of their teachers.
174 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

Acknowledgements

We wish to warmly thank all the students who participated in this study for their
interest (sometimes passion), questions, answers, reections and all the work that
helped us to understand their beliefs about mathematics. We are also grateful to
the teachers for their interest and co-operation and to the school principal who
allowed and supported the research. Finally, we express our gratitude to the
anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the earlier version of this
manuscript.

References
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2001). Applying the Rasch model. Fundamental measurement in the human
sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brousseau, G. (1990). Le contrat didactique: le milieu. Recherches en Didactique de la Mathematique, 9,
308336.
Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2001). Beliefs about academic knowledge. Educational Psychology
Review, 13(4), 385418.
Carpenter, T. P., Lindquist, M. M., Matthews, W., & Silver, E. A. (1983). Results of the third NAEP
mathematics assessment: secondary school. Mathematics Teacher, 76, 652659.
Cobb, P., Yachel, E., & Wood, T. (1992). A constructivist alternative to the representational view of
mind in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 233.
Cobb, P., & Yachel, E. (1998). A constructivist perspective on the culture of the mathematics classroom.
In F. Seeger, J. Voigt, & U. Waschescio (Eds.), The culture of mathematics classroom (pp. 158190).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cognition and the Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum,
instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
De Corte, E., Opt Eynde, P., & Verschael, L. (2002). Knowing what to believe: the relevance of stu-
dents mathematical beliefs for mathematics education. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.),
Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 297320). Mah-
wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
De Corte, E., & Verschael, L. (1989). Teaching word problems in the primary school: what research
has to say to the teacher. In B. Greer, & G. Mulhern (Eds.), New developments in teaching mathemat-
ics (pp. 85106). London: Routledge.
De Corte, E., Verschael, L., & Opt Eynde, P. (2000). Self-regulation: a characteristic and a goal of
mathematics education. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-
regulation (pp. 687726). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Franke, M. L., Fennema, E., & Carpenter, T. P. (1997). Teachers creating change. Examining evolving
beliefs and classroom practice. In E. Fennema, & B. S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teacher in tran-
sition. The studies in mathematical thinking and learning series (pp. 225282). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Garofalo, J. (1989). Beliefs and their inuence on mathematical performance. Mathematics Teacher, 82,
502505.
Higgins, K. M. (1997). The eect of a year-long instruction in mathematical problem-solving on middle
school students attitudes, beliefs, and abilities. Journal of Experimental Education, 66, 528.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: beliefs about
knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88140.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.) (2002), Personal epistemology. The psychology of beliefs about
knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jehng, J. J., Johnson, S. D., & Anderson, R. C. (1993). Schooling and students epistemological beliefs
about learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 2325.
 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176 175

Kardash, C. M., & Scholes, R. J. (1996). Eects of preexisting beliefs, epistemological beliefs, and
need for cognition on interpretation of controversial issues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88,
260271.
King, P. A., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reective judgment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. A three level model of cog-
nitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222232.
Kloosterman, P. (1988). Self-condence and motivation in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 80, 345351.
Kloosterman, P., & Stage, F. K. (1992). Measuring beliefs about mathematical problem-solving. School
Science and Mathematics, 92, 109115.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: math-
ematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 2963.
Lucangeli, D., Coi, G., & Bosco, P. (1997). Metacognitive awareness in good and poor math problem
solvers. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 12, 209212.
Malmivuori, M., & Pehkonen, E. (1997). Mathematical beliefs behind school performances. In E. Pehkonen,
& M. -L. Neuvonen-Rauhla (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st conference of the international group for
the psychology of mathematics educationLathi, Finland: PME (Program Committee Publisher).
Mason, L. (2002). Developing epistemological thinking to foster conceptual change. In M. Limon, &
L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change. Issues in theory and practice (pp. 301335).
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Mason, L. (2003a). Personal epistemologies and intentional conceptual change. In G. M. Sinatra, &
P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 139236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Mason, L. (2003b). High school students beliefs about math, mathematical problem-solving, and their
achievement in math: a cross-sectional study. Educational Psychology, 23, 7385.
McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on aect in mathematics education: a reconceptualization. In
D. A. Grows (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 575596).
New York: Macmillan.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.
Pehkonen, E. (1998). Teachers conceptions on mathematics teaching. In M. Hannula (Ed.), Current
state of research on mathematical beliefs V (pp. 5865). Proceedings of the MAVI-5 work-
shopHelsinki, Finland: Department of Teacher Education, University of Helsinki.
Pehkonen, E., & Torner, G. (1996). Mathematical beliefs and dierent aspects of their meaning.
International Review on Mathematical Education (ZDM), 28, 101108.
Perry Jr., W. G. (1968). Patterns of development in thought and values of students in a Liberal Arts
College: a validation of a scheme. Cambridge, MA: Bureau of Study Counsel, Harvard University
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 024315).
Qian, G., & Alvermann, D. (1995). Role of epistemological beliefs and learned helplessness in secondary
school students learning science concepts from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 282292.
Reusser, K. (1988). Problem-solving beyond the logic of things: contextual eects on understanding and
solving word problems. Instructional Science, 17, 309338.
Ryan, M. P. (1984). Monitoring text comprehension: individual dierences in epistemological standards.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 248258.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1983). Beyond the purely cognitive: beliefs system, social cognition, and metacogni-
tion as driving forces in intellectual performance. Cognitive Science, 7, 329363.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: the disasters of well taught math-
ematics classes. Educational Psychologist, 23, 145166.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Explorations of students mathematical beliefs and behavior. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 338355.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1991). On mathematics as sense making: an informal attack on the unfortunate div-
orce of formal and informal mathematics. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Infor-
mal reasoning and education (pp. 311343). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
176 L. Mason, L. Scrivani / Learning and Instruction 14 (2004) 153176

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem-solving, metacognition, and sense

making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and
learning (pp. 334370). New York: Macmillan.
Schommer, M. (1990). Eects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 82, 498504.
Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text compre-
hension: believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 435443.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two methaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational
Researcher, 27, 413.
Silver, E. A. (1985). Research in teaching mathematical problem-solving: some underrepresented themes
and directions. In E. A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem-solving: multiple
research perspectives (pp. 247266). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Torner, G. (1998). Mathematical beliefs and their impact on the students mathematical performance.
Questions raised by the TIMSS results. In M. Hannula (Ed.), Current state of research on mathemat-
ical beliefs V (pp. 8391). Proceedings of the MAVI-5 workshop. Helsinki, Finland: Department of
Teacher Education, University of Helsinki.
Verschael, L., De Corte, E., & Borghart (1997). Pre-service teachers conceptions and beliefs about the
role of real-world knowledge in mathematical modelling of school word problems. Learning and
Instruction, 7, 339359.
Verschael, L., De Corte, E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of
school arithmetic words problems. Learning and Instruction, 4, 283294.
Verschael, L., De Corte, E., & Lasure, S. (1999). Childrens conceptions about the role of real-world
knowledge in mathematical modeling of school word problems. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniaodu, &
M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 175189). Amsterdam: Pergamon/
Elsevier.
Verschael, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lisse, The Nether-
lands: Sweits & Zeitlinger.
Wyndhamn, J., & Saljo, R. (1997). Word problems and mathematical reasoning: a study of childrens
mastery of reference and meaning in textual realities. Learning and Instruction, 7, 361382.
Zan, R., & Poli, P. (1996). Bravi e cattivi solutori a confronto nella scelta di problemi impossibili
(Good and poor math problem solvers in the choice of impossible problems). Linsegnamento della
matematica e delle scienze integrate, 19A, 410422.