See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/234679062

Teaching Math in the Primary Grades: The Learning Trajectories Approach

Article  in  YC Young Children · January 2009

CITATIONS READS
10 8,881

2 authors:

Julie Sarama Douglas H. Clements

University of Denver University of Denver
220 PUBLICATIONS   5,425 CITATIONS    399 PUBLICATIONS   10,276 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

TRIAD - Technology-enhanced, Research-based Instruction, Assessment, and professional Development View project

Children's Measurement View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Douglas H. Clements on 30 January 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Of Primary Interest

Teaching Math in the Primary Grades

The Learning Trajectories Approach
Julie Sarama and Douglas H. Clements
Two kindergarten teachers sit down for lunch dur-
ing a professional development workshop. One says,
2. All children have the potential to learn challenging
“I think it’s ridiculous. The children are still babies.
and interesting math.
They’re trying to teach them too much.” Her friend
nods. Soon they are joined by a colleague from Primary grade children have an often surprising ability to
another school, who bubbles, “Isn’t this great? The do abstract math—that is, math that is done by reasoning
children are going to know so much more!” mentally, without the need for concrete objects. Listen to
the worries of this first-grader.
Most of us can sympathize with both perspectives. What “I find it easier not to do it [simple addition] with my fingers
should we be teaching in the early grades? Three research because sometimes I get into a big muddle with them [and]
findings provide some guidance in mathematics instruction. I find it much harder to add up because I am not concentrat-
ing on the sum. I am concentrating on getting my fingers
1. Learning substantial math is critical for primary right . . . It can take longer to work out the sum [with fingers]
grade children. than it does to work out the sum in my head.” [In her head,
The early years are especially important for math devel- Emily imagined dot arrays. Why didn’t she just use those?] “If
opment. Children’s knowledge of math in these years we don’t use our fingers, the teacher is going to think, ‘Why
predicts their math achievement for later years—and aren’t they using their fingers . . . they are just sitting there
thinking’ . . . We are meant to be using our fingers because it is
throughout their school career. Furthermore, what they
easier . . . which it is not.” (Gray & Pitta 1997, 35)
know in math predicts their later reading achievement as
well (Duncan et al. in press). Given that early math learning Should the teacher encourage Emily to use concrete
predicts later math and reading achievement, math appears objects to solve math problems? Or should she encourage
to be a core component of learning and thinking. children like Emily to use arithmetic reasoning?
Primary grade children often know, and can definitely
learn, far more challenging and interesting math than they
are taught in most U.S. classrooms. That does not necessar-
Julie Sarama, PhD, is an associate professor of mathematics
education at University of Buffalo, State University of New York. ily mean math pushed down from higher grades. It means
She has published over 100 research articles and books in her letting children invent their own strategies for solving a
areas of interest, the early learning of mathematics and the role variety of types of problems. How can teachers best sup-
of technology. port creative thinking in mathematics?
Douglas H. Clements, PhD, SUNY Distinguished Professor, was
a kindergarten and preschool teacher. He has published over 100 3. Understanding children’s mathematical develop-
refereed research studies, 10 books, and 300 additional publica- ment helps teachers be knowledgeable and effective in
tions and has directed over 10 projects funded by NSF and IES. teaching math.
This article is based on work supported in part by the Institute Children’s thinking follows natural developmental paths
of Educational Sciences (U.S. Department of Education, under
the Interagency Educational Research Initiative, or IERI, a in learning math. When teachers understand these paths
collaboration of the IES, NSF, and NICHHD) under Grant No. and offer activities based on children’s progress along
R305K05157 to D.H. Clements, J. Sarama, and J. Lee, “Scaling them, they build math learning environments that are
Up TRIAD: Teaching Early Mathematics for Understanding with developmentally appropriate and particularly effective. A
Trajectories and Technologies.” useful tool in understanding and supporting the develop-
ment of children’s mathematical reasoning is a math learn-
®
2, 3 ing trajectory. There are learning trajectories for mathemat-

Young Children • March 2009 63
ics at all age levels, from birth throughout the school years, to each level of thinking in a developmental progression.
and for learning all kinds of content—from specific math The tasks are designed to help children learn the ideas and
concepts such as number and operations to specific sci- practice the skills needed to master that level. Teachers
ence concepts like understanding electricity. use instructional tasks to promote children’s growth from
one level to the next

Learning trajectories
Teaching challenging and interesting math
Math learning trajectories have three parts: a mathemati-
cal goal, a developmental path along which children’s The three research findings—the importance of math
math knowledge grows to reach that goal, and a set of learning in the primary grades, all children’s potential to
instructional tasks, or activities, for each level of children’s learn math, and teachers’ need to understand children’s
understanding along that path to help them become profi- learning development—have implications for teaching pri-
cient in that level before moving on to the next level. Let’s mary grade math well. We suggest the following approach:
examine each of these three parts. • Know and use learning trajectories.
• Include a wide variety of instructional activities. The 
Goal. The first part of a learning trajectory is the goal. learning trajectories provide a guide as to which activities
Goals should include the big ideas of math, such as “num- are likely to challenge children to invent new strategies and
bers can be used to tell us how many, describe order, and build new knowledge.
measure” and “geometry can be used to understand and
• Use a combination of teaching strategies. One effective 
to represent the objects, directions, and locations in our
approach is to (a) discuss a problem with a group, (b) fol-
world, and the relationship between them” (Clements,
low up by having children work in pairs, and then (c) have
Sarama, & DiBiase 2004). In this article, we look at the goal
the children share solution strategies back with the group.
of knowing how to solve a variety of addition and subtrac-
Discuss strategies with children in pairs and individually.
tion problems.
Differentiate instruction by giving groups or individual
children different problem types.
Developmental path. The second part of a learning trajec-
tory consists of levels of thinking, each more sophisticated Alexander and Entwisle state that “the early grades may be
than the last, leading to achieving the mathematical goal. precisely the time that schools have their strongest effects”
That is, the developmental path describes a typical learn- (1988, 114). Math is so important to children’s success in
ing route children follow in developing understanding of school, in the primary grades and in future learning, that it is
and skill in a particular mathematics topic. critical to give children motivating, substantive educational
Learning trajectories are important because young experiences. Learning trajectories are a powerful tool to
children’s ideas and their interpretations of situations are engage all children in creating and understanding math.
different from those of adults. Teachers must interpret
what the child is doing and thinking and attempt to see
the situation from the child’s viewpoint. Knowledge of References
developmental paths enhances teachers’ understanding of
Alexander, K.L., & D.R. Entwisle. 1988. Achievement in the first two
children’s thinking, helping teachers assess children’s level years of school: Patterns and processes. Monographs of the Society for
of understanding and offer instructional activities at that Research in Child Development, vol. 53, no. 2, serial no. 157.
level. Similarly, effective teachers consider the instructional Clements, D.H., J. Sarama, & A.-M. DiBiase. 2004. Engaging young children
in mathematics: Standards for early childhood mathematics education.
tasks from the child’s perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Clements, D.H., & J. Sarama. 2009. Learning and teaching early math: The
Instructional tasks. The third part of a learning trajectory learning trajectories approach. New York: Routledge.
Duncan, G.J., C.J. Dowsett, A. Claessens, K. Magnuson, A.C. Huston, P.
consists of sets of instructional tasks or activities matched Klebanov, et al. In press. School readiness and later achievement.
Developmental Psychology.
Gray, E.M., & D. Pitta. 1997. Number processing: Qualitative differences
in thinking and the role of imagery. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual
The National Association of Early Childhood Specialists Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Austral-
in State Departments of Education (NAECS/SDE) works asia, vol. 3, 35–42, eds. L. Puig & A.Gutiérrez. Rotorua, New Zealand:
to improve instruction, curriculum, and administration in The Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
education programs for young children and their families. Of Sarama, J., & D.H. Clements. 2009. Early childhood mathematics edu-
Primary Interest is written by members of NAECS/SDE for cation research: Learning trajectories for young children. New York:
kindergarten and primary teachers. The column appears in Routledge.
March, July, and November issues of Young Children and
Beyond the Journal (online at www.journal.naeyc.org/btj). Copyright © 2009 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. See
Permissions and Reprints online at www.journal.naeyc.org/about/permissions.asp.

64 Young Children • March 2009
 Learning Trajectory for Addition and Subtraction: Sample Levels of the
Developmental Path and Examples of Instructional Tasks
This chart gives simple labels and a sampling of levels in the developmental learning progressions for ages
5 through 7 years. The ages in the first column are not exact indications—children in challenging educational
environments often create strategies that are surprisingly sophisticated. The second column describes four
main levels of thinking in the addition and subtraction learning trajectory. These levels are samples—there are
many levels in between them (for full learning trajectories, see Clements & Sarama 2009 and Sarama &
Clements 2009). The third column briefly describes examples of instructional tasks.

Age Developmental path— Instructional tasks

Sample levels
5 Find Change. Children find the missing Word Problems. For example, say to the children, “You have 5 balls and
addend (5 + _ = 7) by adding on objects. then get some more. Now you have 7 balls in all. How many more balls
did you get?” Children use balls in 2 colors to solve such problems.

5½ Counting Strategies. Children find sums for How Many Now? Problems. For example, have the children count
joining problems (“You have 8 apples and get objects as you place them in a box. Ask, “How many are in the box now?”
3 more . . .”) and part-part-whole problems Add 1, repeating the question, then check the children’s responses by
(“6 girls and 5 boys . . .”) with finger patterns counting all the objects. Repeat, checking occasionally. When children
[counting using fingers and quickly recogniz- are ready, sometimes add 2, and eventually more, objects.
ing the quantity] and/or by counting on.
Counting on. The teacher asks, “How much
is 4 and 3 more?” A child replies, “4 . . . 5, 6,
7 [uses a rhythmic or finger pattern to keep
track]. 7!”
Counting up. A child may solve a missing Double Compare. Children compare sums
addend (3 + _ = 7) or compare problems by of 2 cards to determine which sum is greater.
counting up; for example, the child counts Encourage the children to use more sophisticated
“4, 5, 6, 7” while putting up fingers, and then strategies, such as counting on.
counts or recognizes the 4 fingers raised.
Or the teacher asks, “You have 6 balls.
How many more do you need to have 8
Bright Idea. Using a numeral and a frame with
balls?” The child says, “6, 7 [puts up a fin-
dots, children count on from the numeral to identify
ger], 8 [puts up a second finger]. 2!”
the total amount. They then move forward a corre-
sponding number of spaces on a game board.

Part-Whole. The child has an initial part-

6 whole understanding and can solve all the Hidden Objects. Hide 4 counters under a dark cloth and show children
preceding problem types using flexible strat- 7 counters. Tell them that 4 counters are hidden and challenge them to
egies (may use some known combinations, tell you how many counters there are in all. Or tell the children there are
such as “5 + 5 is 10”). 11 counters in all, and ask how many are hidden.
Have the children discuss their solution strategies.
Repeat with different sums.
Barkley’s Bones. Children determine the missing
addend in problems such as 4 + _ = 7.
Deriver. The child uses flexible strategies
7 and derived combinations (“7 + 7 is 14, so 7 Twenty-one. Play this card game, whose object is
+ 8 is 15”) to solve all types of problems. to have the sum of one’s cards be 21 or as close
as possible without exceeding 21. An ace is worth either 1 or 11, and
cards for 2 through 10 are worth their face value. A child deals everyone 2
cards, including herself.
Adapted from D.H. Clements and J. Sarama, Learning and • In each round, if a player’s sum is less than 21, the player can
Teaching Early Math: The Learning Trajectories Approach (New request another card or stand pat, saying, “Hold.”
York: Routledge, 2009), and J. Sarama and D.H. Clements,
Early Childhood Mathematics Education Research: Learning • If the new card makes the player’s sum greater than 21, the player is out.
Trajectories for Young Children (New York: Routledge, 2009).
• Play continues until everyone holds. The player whose sum is closest
Activity images from D.H. Clements and J. Sarama, Building to 21 wins.
Blocks [Computer software] (Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw-
Hill, 2007). Used with permission from SRA/McGraw-Hill. Multidigit Addition and Subtraction. “What’s 28 + 35?”

View publication stats