Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine how eighth-grade students use symbols and algebraic relationships, patterns and generalization, and multiple representations in geometry and measurement tasks within the framework of algebraic thinking, and to identify the conceptual difficulties that emerge during this process. In the study, algebraic thinking was addressed through the components of symbols and algebraic relationships, patterns and generalization, and multiple representations. The study was conducted using a basic qualitative research design. The data were collected through clinical interviews, video recordings, and student worksheets from six eighth-grade students attending a public school with a middle socio-economic profile. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings indicate that students’ algebraic thinking levels differ markedly in geometry and measurement tasks in terms of their ways of using and interpreting formulas, simplifying algebraic expressions, constructing equations appropriate to verbal situations, interpreting the meanings of literal expressions, making generalizations for near and far terms in patterns, and transitioning between representations.  

Keywords

References

• Apsari, R. A., Putri, R. I. I., Abels, M., & Prayitno, S. (2020). Geometry representation to develop algebraic thinking: A recommendation for a pattern investigation in pre-algebra class. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.1.9535.45-58
• Blanton, M. L., & Kaput, J. J. (2011). Functional thinking as a route into algebra in the elementary grades. In J. Cai & E. Knuth (Eds.), Early algebraization: A global dialogue from multiple perspectives (pp. 5–23). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4_2
• Blanton, M., Stephens, A., Knuth, E., Gardiner, A. M., Isler, I., & Kim, J. S. (2015). The development of children's algebraic thinking: The impact of a comprehensive early algebra intervention in third grade. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 46(1), 39-87. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.46.1.0039
• Bozkuş, F., Kalaycı, Ö., & Toluk Uçar, Z. (2025). An analysis of algebra lesson: Can apples and pears be added? Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(1), 274–295. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202529564
• Day, L., Siemon, D., Callingham, R., & Seah, R. (2024). Connecting the threads: The role of multiplicative thinking in algebraic, geometrical, and statistical reasoning. Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 325–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2024.2372365
• Elbir, D., & Özmen, Z. M. (2024). Investigation of mathematics teachers’ teaching practices in transition to algebra in the context of letter symbols. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 6(2), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.33902/jpsp.202426544
• Ginsburg, H. P. (1997). Entering the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. Cambridge University Press.
• Goldin, G. A. (2000). A scientific perspective on structured, task-based interviews in mathematics education research. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 517–545). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410602725
• Grandau, L., & Stephens, A. C. (2006). Algebraic thinking and geometry. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 11(7), 344–349. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTMS.11.7.0344
• Jupri, A., Usdiyana, D., & Sispiyati, R. (2026). From student difficulties to design of a hypothetical learning trajectory: The case of system of linear equations in two variables. International Journal of Didactical Studies, 7(3), e41091. https://doi.org/10.33902/ijods.202641091
• Kama, Z., Işıksal Bostan, M., & Tunç Pekkan, Z. (2023). Sixth-grade students’ pattern generalization approaches. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(5), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202316928
• Kaput, J. J. (2000). Transforming algebra from an engine of inequity to an engine of mathematical power by “algebrafying” the K–12 curriculum (ED441664). ERIC. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED441664.pdf
• Kaput, J. J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 133–155). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410602619
• Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 235–272). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(3), 317–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00311062
• Kieran, C. (2004). Algebraic thinking in the early grades. In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 139–151). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kieran, C. (2022). The multi-dimensionality of early algebraic thinking: Background, overarching dimensions, and new directions. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 54(6), 1131–1150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01435-6
• Kuchemann, D. (1978). Children’s understanding of numerical variables. Mathematics in School, 7(4), 23–26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30213397
• Kükey, E., & Aslaner, R. (2023). To what extent can teachers and preservice teachers predict students’ mathematical thinking? A qualitative analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(4), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202319993
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Author.
• Nitko, A. J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2014). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Ntsohi, M. M. (2013). Investigating teaching and learning of Grade 9 Algebra through excel spreadsheets: a mixed methods case study for Lesotho [Doctoral dissertation, Stellenbosch University]. http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/85657
• Panasuk, R. M. (2010). Three phase ranking framework for assessing conceptual understanding in algebra using multiple representations. Education, 131(2), 235–257.
• Popham, W. J. (2017). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (8th ed.). Pearson.
• Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students' types of generalization. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327833MTL0501_02
• Rivera, F. D. (2010). Visual templates in pattern generalization activity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(3), 297–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9222-0
• Sarmasági, P., Rumbus, A., Bilbao, J., Margitay-Becht, A., Pluhár, Z., Rebollar, C., & Dagienė, V. (2025). Bridging algebraic and computational thinking: Impacts on student development in K-12 education. Informatics in Education, 24(2), 343-376. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2025.13
• Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The gains and pitfalls of reification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 191–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273628
• Sun, S., Sun, D., & Xu, T. (2023). The developmental progression of early algebraic thinking of elementary school students. Journal of Intelligence, 11(12), 222. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11120222
• Tall, D., & Thomas, M. (1991). Encouraging versatile thinking in algebra using the computer. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 125–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00368352
• Tanışlı, D., & Yavuzsoy Köse, N. (2011). Generalization strategies about linear figural patterns: Effect of figural and numerical clues. Education and Science, 36(160), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.15390/ES.2011.937
• Türkmen, S., & Tanışlı, D. (2019). Seventh-grade students’ views on the relationship between verbal and algebraic representations. Elementary Education Online, 18(3), 1298–1314. https://doi.org/10.14689/issn.2148-2624.1.7c1s.16m
• Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele levels and achievement in secondary school geometry. University of Chicago.
• Van de Walle, J., Karp, K., & Bay-Williams, J. (2012). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.). Pearson.
• Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and insight: A theory of mathematics education. Academic Press.

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.