The Power of Division: Unlocking Mathematical Potential

Division is a fundamental mathematical operation crucial in developing numerical understanding and problem-solving skills.

Introduction:

Division is a fundamental mathematical operation crucial in developing numerical understanding and problemsolving skills. Research has shown that a child’s grasp of division in elementary school is one of the strongest predictors of high school math achievement, even outweighing factors like IQ and family background. A groundbreaking study found that early division knowledge had the strongest correlation (0.69) in the U.S., indicating that students’ division knowledge explains approximately 50% of their mathematics proficiency in high school (Siegler et al., 2012).

This research overview will explore the importance of division terminology, types of division problem contexts, division’s critical role in mathematical development, and effective teaching strategies for educators and parents. By understanding these key aspects, we can better support students in building a strong foundation for future mathematical success, potentially influencing their academic achievements beyond elementary school.

Division Terminology

To enhance students’ conceptual understanding of division, researchers suggest using more intuitive terminology that aligns with children’s natural thinking processes (Brendefur et al., 2018; Fosnot & Dolk, 2002). This approach combines descriptive language with formal terms.

Division Equation: Dividend (Total) ÷ Divisor (Unit) = Quotient (Iterator)

Dividend or Total: The entire amount being divided.

Divisor or Unit: The size of each group or the amount in each share.

Quotient or Iterator: How many times does the unit fit into the total?

Let us use 18 ÷ 3 = 6 as an example. Without a context (or story problem), we should ask, “How many units of 3 fit into the total 18? Does it fit in evenly with no remainders? The unit 3 fits into 18 with 6 iterations with no remainders. Alternatively, we can say that 6 iterations of the unit 3 make a total of 18.

The use of the terms “total,” “unit,” and “iterator” in division instruction offers multiple advantages for students’ mathematical development. These terms provide consistency across multiplication and division operations, aligning with children’s intuitive understanding of division concepts. They offer flexibility in addressing both partitive and measurement division problems, making it easier for instructors and students to grasp the underlying principles. The terminology also establishes a clear connection to real-world situations, enhancing the relevance of division in everyday contexts. Perhaps most importantly, these terms emphasize conceptual understanding rather than mere procedural knowledge, fostering a deeper and more flexible grasp of division principles that can serve as a strong foundation for future mathematical learning

Types of Division Problems

There are two problem types for division story problems: measurement and partitive division (Kouba, 1989). Understanding these types is essential for effective instruction and student comprehension. Without context, we discussed the divisor as the unit and the quotient or answer as the iterator. To teach division with understanding, it is important to be aware that phrases such as “number of groups” or “group size” are perfectly viable during early learning. However, these terms become confusing and misaligned over time with division contexts involving rational numbers. Therefore, a deep understanding of division contexts and the appropriate presentation of these ideas, given students’ age and background knowledge, is necessary for long-term effective division learning.

Measurement Division

Measurement Division Equation: Dividend (Total) ÷ Divisor (Unit) = Quotient (Iterator)

Measurement division, also known as quotative division or grouping, aligns with the structural language of "total," "unit," and "iterator." This type of division problem involves determining how many times a given unit fits into a total amount. The answer is the number of iterations.

In measurement division:

• The total (dividend) and the unit (divisor representing the size of each group) are known.

• The iterator (quotient representing the number of groups) is unknown

For example, "A farmer has 18 chickens and wants to put them in coops that hold 3 chickens each. How many coops will the farmer need?" We know the total is 18 chickens, and the unit is 3 chickens per coop. However, we do not know the iterations of how many coops are needed to hold all the chickens.

Another way of asking this is: "How many iterations of the unit (3 chickens) are needed to reach the total (18 chickens)?" This structural approach to measurement division helps students understand the problem as repeated groups or iterations, reinforcing the connection between division and multiplication. It also supports the development of various problem-solving strategies, such as repeated subtraction or building up through repeated addition. By consistently using this terminology, educators can help students develop a more intuitive and flexible understanding of measurement division.

Partitive Division

Partitive division, also known as sharing division, aligns with the structural language of "total," "iterator," and "unit," but in a slightly different configuration from measurement division. This type of division problem involves distributing a total amount equally among a known number of iterations or groups to find the unit or number in each group.

Partitive Division Equation: Dividend (Total) ÷ Divisor (Iterator) = Quotient (Unit)

In partitive division:

• The total (dividend) and the iterator (divisor representing the number of groups) are known

• The unit (quotient, representing the size of each group) is unknown

For example, "A farmer has 18 chickens and wants to distribute them equally among 3 coops. How many chickens will be in each coop?" We know the total is 18 chickens, and the iteration is 3 coops. However, we do not know the unit or how many chickens per coop there are.

The question asks: "What unit size results when the total (18 chickens) is divided into a known number of iterations (3 coops)?" This structural approach to partitive division helps students understand the problem as equal sharing or distribution, reinforcing the concept of fair sharing. It also supports the development of various problem-solving strategies, such as one-by-one distribution or using multiplication to check the solution.

Research supports the idea that consistent use of appropriate terminology can help students develop a more intuitive and flexible understanding of division types. Studies have shown that children often employ different strategies for partitive and measurement division problems, highlighting the importance of exposing students to both types (Kouba, 1989). Distinguishing between these division types is crucial for developing a comprehensive grasp of division concepts (Fischbein et al., 1985).

Educators can foster this understanding by using clear, consistent terminology and providing diverse problem-solving opportunities. For example, partitive division involves knowing the total and iterator (number of units) but seeking the unit size. In contrast, measurement division involves knowing the total and unit size but seeking the iterator. By emphasizing these distinctions and connections, teachers can help students build a strong foundation for more advanced mathematical concepts (van Putten et al., 2005).

Furthermore, research indicates that students benefit from solving both types of division problems, as each contributes uniquely to their overall understanding of division (Fosnot & Dolk, 2002). This approach aligns to build procedural fluency from conceptual understanding, a key principle in effective mathematics instruction (Gravemeijer & Bakker, 2006). By consistently using structural language such as "total," "unit," and "iterator," educators can help students develop a more flexible and comprehensive understanding of division, recognizing the underlying connections between partitive and measurement division while appreciating their distinct characteristics (Brendefur et al., 2013).

The Progression of Division Skills

Division skills develop progressively, starting with informal strategies and evolving into more sophisticated approaches. Research indicates that guiding students through various levels of division strategies leads to deeper mathematical understanding (van Putten et al., 2005). This progression aligns with progressive formalization, where students build on their intuitive knowledge to develop more advanced problem-solving techniques.

In approaching division problems, students typically employ different strategies based on the problem type, as noted by Kouba (1989). Measurement division often begins with repeated subtraction, removing the unit size from the total until it reaches zero and counting the number of subtractions. In contrast, partitive division problems usually prompt a "dealing out" strategy, where students distribute items one by one into the given number of groups until all items are used. These initial approaches serve as foundational strategies for more advanced division concepts. . Recognizing and nurturing these distinct problem-solving techniques is crucial for developing a comprehensive understanding of division and its various applications.

Fosnot and Dolk (2002) emphasize the importance of contextual learning in generating diverse models and strategies for division. By presenting division problems in real-world contexts, educators can help students develop an intuitive understanding and connect formal mathematical concepts to their everyday experiences. This approach, combined with consistent terminology, supports the gradual progression from informal to formal division strategies.

As students advance, they can be guided towards more efficient methods such as chunking, using number relationships, and, eventually, formal algorithms. This progressive formalization allows students to develop a flexible and deep understanding of division, preparing them for more complex mathematical concepts in the future.

The journey of division skill development unfolds progressively, aligning with the concept of "progressive mathematization" (Gravemeijer & Bakker, 2006). This progression allows students to build on their intuitive understanding and develop increasingly sophisticated strategies over time.

At the informal stage, students begin with direct counting, repeated subtraction, repeated addition, and sharing/distributing strategies. For measurement division, number lines can be effective, allowing students to make jumps representing the divisor. For partitive division, bar models help visualize the total being shared equally.

As students progress to low-level chunking, they start subtracting or adding small multiples of the divisor and using doubling or halving strategies. Ratio tables become helpful here, especially for measurement division, helping students organize their thinking and see patterns. For partitive division, area models can illustrate the relationship between the total and the number of groups.

In the progressive and high-level chunking stage, students gradually increase the size of chunks subtracted or added and learn to partition the dividend according to place value. Ratio tables and partial quotients models work well for both types of division at this stage, allowing students to subtract larger chunks efficiently.

Students learn to use number facts and relations flexibly as they develop mental calculation strategies. This stage does not necessarily require a specific model but builds on the understanding developed through previous models

Finally, students learn the traditional division algorithm, which can be seen as a compact version of the partial quotients model. Throughout this journey, it is crucial to continually connect these strategies to real-world contexts and encourage students to explain their thinking, fostering a deep, conceptual understanding of division.

Challenges and Solutions

Research on division in elementary mathematics education consistently emphasizes the importance of developing strong conceptual foundations and utilizing meaningful contexts and models. Studies have shown that elementary school students’ understanding of division is a powerful predictor of their high school math achievement, even outweighing factors like IQ and family background (Siegler et al., 2012). This underscores the critical need for effective division instruction in early mathematics education.

Multiple studies highlight the benefits of using intuitive terminology and models to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of division. Terms like "total," "unit," and "iterator" align with children’s natural thinking processes and provide consistency across multiplication and division operations (Fosnot & Dolk, 2002; Gravemeijer & Bakker, 2006). Research also indicates that allowing students to progress through various levels of division strategies, from informal methods to more sophisticated approaches, leads to deeper mathematical knowledge (van Putten et al., 2005). This progression, often called progressive mathematization, supports the development of procedural fluency and conceptual understanding.

Effective teaching strategies identified across studies include implementing a realistic mathematics education approach, encouraging strategy development, and utilizing multimodal representations (Gravemeijer & Bakker, 2006; Neumann, 2013). Researchers emphasize the importance of addressing common challenges and misconceptions, such as difficulties with understanding the relationship between division and multiplication or interpreting remainders (Jordan et al., 2013). By integrating these research-based insights, educators can design more effective instruction to support students’ development of division concepts and skills, ultimately preparing them for success in higher-level mathematics and real-world applications (Geary, 2011; McCrink & Spelke, 2016).

References

Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. Baroody, A. J. (2003). The development of adaptive expertise and flexibility: The integration of conceptual and procedural knowledge. In A. J.

Baroody & A. Dowker (Eds.), The development of arithmetic concepts and skills: Constructing adaptive expertise (pp. 1–33). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Brendefur, J., Strother, S., & Thiede, K. (2018). Building place value understanding through modeling and structure. Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(2), 26-48.

Fischbein, E., Deri, M., Nello, M. S., & Marino, M. S. (1985). The role of implicit models in solving verbal problems in multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(1), 3-17.Fosnot, C. T., & Dolk, M. (2002). Young mathematicians at work: Constructing fractions, decimals, and percents. Heinemann.

Geary, D. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1539–1552.

Gravemeijer, K., & Bakker, A. (2006). Design research and design heuristics in mathematics education. In A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future (pp. 237–262). Sense Publishers.

Jordan, N. C., Hansen, N., Fuchs, L. S., Siegler, R. S., Gersten, R., & Micklos, D. (2013). Developmental predictors of fraction concepts and procedures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(1), 45–58.

Kouba, V. L. (1989). Children’s solution strategies for equivalent set multiplication and division word problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(2), 147–158.McCrink, K., & Spelke, E. S. (2016). Non-symbolic division in childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 142, 66–82.

McCrink, K., & Spelke, E. S. (2016). Non-symbolic division in childhood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 142, 66-82.

Mulligan, J., & Mitchelmore, M. (1997). Young children’s intuitive models of multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), 309–330.

Neumann, K. (2013). Using cognitive demand to assess mathematical processes. In A. M. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 385–392). PME.

Siegler, R. S., Duncan, G. J., Davis-Kean, P. E., Duckworth, K., Claessens, A., Engel, M., Susperreguy, M. I., & Chen, M. (2012). Early predictors of high school mathematics achievement. Psychological Science, 23(7), 691–697. van Putten, C. M.,

van den Brom-Snijders, P. A., & Beishuizen, M. (2005). Progressive mathematization of long division strategies in Dutch primary schools. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(1), 44–73..

Social Media

Research on division in elementary mathematics reveals powerful strategies for building a strong foundation in this critical skill. Our latest overview explores how key approaches like progressive mathematization, intuitive models, and real-world applications contribute to a deeper understanding of division concepts and their relationships.

The research emphasizes that early division knowledge is a crucial predictor of long-term mathematical success, with elementary skills explaining up to 50% of high school math proficiency. Strategies such as using structural language (total, unit, iterator), exploring both partitive and measurement division, and employing visual representations support division skill development by bridging concrete experiences with abstract concepts.

This research connects cognitive science with practical classroom applications, empowering educators to foster deeper mathematical understanding and problem-solving skills in their students. By implementing these evidencebased strategies, educators can lay a solid foundation for advanced mathematical concepts, setting students up for success in higher-level mathematics and beyond.

Join us in exploring these powerful learning strategies and their impact on mathematical thinking!