# SUMMARY

Institution Affiliation:

Howa person prefers to learn can be referred to as a "learningstyle." No learning style can be perceived as good or bad: themost important issue is that information is imbibed into the tutee`smind effectively. Thus, a tutor`s learning style influences histutoring style profoundly. If a tutor`s learning style clashes withthat of the tutee, trouble and frustration is bound to ensue.Identifying and defining both styles, therefore, becomes a pivotalissue in developing a successful teacher-student relationship(Montogomery and Graot, n.d.). This paper discusses the learningpatterns of 20 students emphasis will be placed on conceptualunderstanding, mathematical reasoning and procedural reasoning.

SectionA

Conceptualunderstanding is perceivable as how students choose to learn, forexample, mathematics, with understanding. This type of understandingbuilds new knowledge from prior knowledge and experience (Gordon,2006). In the case study, where 20 students were assessed, someinconsistencies in conceptual understanding were noted. For example,some patterns were identified: 1/20 students missed question 1a, 3missed 1b, 1 missed 2a, 2 missed 2b, 4 missed 4a, 2 missed question2, 1 missed question 3, 2 missed questions 4 and 5, 1missed question6, 8 missed questions 7 and 9, and 8students missed question 9 on thevocabulary section of the test. The before-mentioned issues mean thata good number of students were incapable of comprehendingmathematical concepts, relations and operations. Focus should,primarily, be placed on equipping students with the requisite skillsto help them learn mathematics: helping them become mathematicallyproficient.

SectionB

Thesecond learning style is procedural fluency. This learning style,also referred to as rote learning or procedural knowledge, paysattention to understanding mathematical concepts. Skills such asbeing flexible in carrying out procedures, accuracy, efficiency andappropriate when it comes to gaining and applying mathematical skillsare emphasised (Gordon, 2006). The case study reflected a strugglewith vocabulary comprehension. The majority of learners were not ableto read instructions carefully, made careless mistakes, and did notuse contextual clues to answer questions. The difference betweenprocedural and conceptual understanding is that the latterconcentrates on acquiring skills that help a student find solutionsto problems while the former concentrates on helping a student becomeproficient in applying mathematical skills.

SectionC

Thelast approach is mathematical reasoning. This approach emphasises"practicalness." Students are helped to understand whycertain principles should be applied (Stacey, 2007). For example,understanding the rationale behind the formula for finding thesurface area of a cylinder: circumfrence×height+2×area of the base. Students are helped to think about mathematics in a different way.According to the case study, 35% of the students were able to applyevaluation criteria number 1: they used context words to derive themeaning of unknown words and phrases. 90% of the students were ableto comprehend the skills that related to evaluation criteria number2: students were able to make a relationship between hundreds, tens,and ones. 60% of the students were also able to understand evaluationcriteria number 3: they read, wrote and modelled numbers to 999.Finally, 85% of the students were able to master evaluation criterianumber 4: they identified and utilised models, words, and alsoexpanded form to make a representation of numbers to 999.

References

Gordon, F. (2006). What Does ConceptualUnderstanding Mean? *NewYork Institute of Technology*.Retrieved fromhttps://www.farmingdale.edu/faculty/sheldon-gordon/RecentArticles/conceptual-understanding.pdf

Montogomery, S., & Groat, L.(n.d.). STUDENTS LEARNING STYLES AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING.Retrieved fromhttp://www.crlt.umich.edu/sites/default/files/resource_files/CRLT_no10.pdf

Stacey, K. (2007). WHAT IS MATHEMATICALTHINKING AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT?. *Universityof Melbourne, Australia*. Retrievedfromhttp://www.criced.tsukuba.ac.jp/math/apec/apec2007/paper_pdf/Kaye%20Stacey.pdf