Concrete Materials in Primary Classrooms: Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices about How and Why they are Used



concrete materials, teacher beliefs, primary school teachers


A study was conducted to explore the beliefs and practices of 49 New South Wales (NSW) primary school teachers regarding their beliefs and practices concerning the use of concrete materials in the learning and teaching of Number and Algebra. This paper reports on elements of the study regarding why and how teachers use concrete materials. Not only do teacher beliefs influence their classroom practice, Buehl and Beck (2014) propose that teacher practices may impact teacher beliefs suggesting they are interrelated. This paper sought to situate teacher beliefs and practices upon a conceptualisation of this interrelationship based on aspects of classroom practice involving concrete materials. The study employed survey methodology utilising a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews to gather data that were analysed to identify key themes regarding teachers’ prevailing beliefs about the use of concrete materials. These themes included a belief in a constructivist approach to learning and teaching mathematics, a cognitive dimension and engagement. On the basis of these findings an overview is suggested positioning teacher beliefs and practices relating to the use of concrete materials.

Author Biography

Maria Therese Quigley, The University of Sydney


Sydney School of Education and Social Work

Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences


Akkan, Y. (2012). Virtual or physical: In-service and pre-service teachers’ beliefs and preferences on manipulatives. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 13(4), 167-192.

Amineh, R. A., & Asl, H. D. (2015). Review of constructivism and social constructivism. Journal of Social sciences, Literature and Languages, 1(1), 9-16.

Attard, C. (2009). 'My favourite subject is maths. For some reason no-one really agrees with me': What Year 6 students say about mathematics. In R. Hunter, B. Bicknell, & T. Burgess (Eds.), Crossing divides: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1). Palmerston North, NZ: MERGA.

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2020). The Australian Curriculum - Mathematics, Retrieved from

Beswick, K. (2011). Teachers’ beliefs about school mathematics and mathematicians’ mathematics and their relationship to practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 127-147.

Bobis, J., Mulligan, J., & Lowrie, T. (2009). Mathematics for children: Challenging children to think mathematically (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.

Booker, G., Bond, D., Sparrow, L., & Swan, P. (2010). Teaching primary mathematics (4th ed.). Pearson.

Bragg, L. (2012). The effect of mathematical games on on-task behaviours in the primary classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(4), 385-401.

Bruner, J. S. (2006). In search of pedagogy: The selected works of Jerome S. Bruner (Vol. I). Routledge.

Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2014). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. In H. Fives, M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers' beliefs, (pp. 66-84). Routledge.

Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods (4th ed.). Longman.

Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers: Beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (p. 709–725). Macmillan Library Reference USA; Prentice Hall International.

Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology. 105(2), 380-400.

Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., & Franke, F. (1996). Cognitively guided instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 97(1), 3-20.

Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In W. D. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255-296). Macmillan.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2020). Common Core Standards for Mathematics. Retrieved from

Demetriou, L. (2015). The use of virtual and concrete manipulatives in kindergarten school [Paper presentation]. CERME 9 - Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education; (pp.1911-1917). ERME, Feb 2015, Prague, Czech Republic.

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (State of Victoria). (2010). Key characteristics of effective numeracy teaching P–6.

Dexter, S. L., Anderson, R. E., & Becker, H. J. (1999). Teacher's views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 221.

Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(1), 13-33.

Ertmer, P.A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25-39.

Figueira-Sampaio, A. S., Santos, E. E. F., Carrijo, G., & Cardoso, A. (2013). Survey of mathematics practices with concrete materials used in Brazilian schools. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 93, 151-157.

Francis, D. I. C. (2015). Dispelling the notion of inconsistencies in teachers’ mathematics beliefs and practices; A 3-year case study. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18, 173-201.

Fullan, M. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). London: Cassell Education Limited.

Golafshani, N. (2013). Teachers’ beliefs and teaching mathematics with manipulatives. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(3), 137-159.

Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D. Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Heinemann.

Howard, P., Perry, B., & Tracey, D. (1997). Mathematics and manipulatives: Comparing primary and secondary mathematics teachers’ views. [Paper presentation]. Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Brisbane, Australia.

Hyman, L., Lamb, J., & Bulmer, M. (2006, April 24-26). The use of pre-existing survey questions: Implications for data quality [Conference Session]. European Conference on Quality in Survey Statistics (Q2006), Cardiff, Wales, UK.

Kane, R., Sandretto, S., & Heath, C. (2002). Telling half the story: A critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 177-228.

Liggett, R. S. (2017). The impact of use of manipulatives on the math scores of Grade 2 students. Brock Education Journal, 26(2), 87-101

Lui, A. L., & Bonner, S. M. (2016). Preservice and inservice teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and instructional planning in primary school mathematics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 1-13.

Marshall, L., & Swan, P. (2005). Developing mathematical thinking with the assistance of manipulatives. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference of The Mathematics Education into the 21st Century Project: Reform, Revolution and Paradigm Shifts in Mathematics Education, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.

Marshall, L., & Swan, P. (2008). Exploring the use of mathematics manipulative materials: Is it what we think it is? Paper presented at the EDU-COM 2008 International Conference - Sustainability in Higher Education: Directions for Change, Perth.

McNeil, N. M., & Jarvin, L. (2007). When theories don't add up: Disentangling the manipulatives debate. Theory into Practice, 46(4), 309-316.

Ministry of Education Singapore. (2012). Mathematics syllabus: Primary one to six. Curriculum Planning and Development Division

Mix, K. (2010). Spatial tools for mathematical thought. In K. Mix, L. Smith & M. Gasser (Eds.), The Spatial Foundations of Language and Cognition (pp. 41-66). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Moyer, P. S. (2001). Are we having fun yet? How teachers use manipulatives to teach mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47, 175-197.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. NCTM.

NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA). (2019). NSW Syllabus for the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics K–10 Syllabus (2012).

Neuman, W. L. (2011). Social research methods (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

Özsoy, G. (2011). An investigation of the relationship between metacognition and mathematics achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(2), 227-235.

Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.

Perry, B. (2007). Australian teachers’ views of effective mathematics teaching and learning. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39, 271-286.

Perry, B., & Howard, P. (1997). Manipulatives in primary mathematics: Implications for leaning and teaching, Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 2(2), 25-30.

Reys, R., Lidquist, M., Lambdin, D. V., Smith, N. L., Rogers, A., Cooke, A., Bennett, S., Ewing, B., & West, J. (2020). Helping children learn mathematics (3rd Aust. ed.). John Wiley & Sons Australia.

Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and practices in reading comprehension instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 559-586.

Rieber, R. W., & Robinson, D. K. (Eds.). (2004). The essential Vygotsky. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H., (2016). Physical and virtual manipulatives: What is “concrete”? In P. S. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives, (pp. 71-91). Mathematical Education in the Digital Era 7.

Skemp, R. R. (1989). Mathematics in the primary school. Routledge Falmer.

Snowman, J., & Biehler, R. (2006). Psychology applied to teaching (11th ed.). Houghton Mifflin Company.

Sowell, E. J. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), 498-505.

Stanley, G., Clarke, D., Cooney, G., Perso, T., & Willis, S. (2008). National numeracy review report May 2008 Retrieved from:

Swan, P., & Marshall, L. (2010). Revisiting mathematics manipulative materials. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(2), 13-19.

Swan, P., Marshall, L., Mildenhall, P., White, G., & de Jong, T. (2007). Are Mathematics Manipulatives being used in schools. If so how? If not why not? [Paper presentation]. Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, Fremantle, Australia.

Swars, S., Smith, S., Smith, M., & Hart, L. (2006). Elementary preservice teachers’ changing pedagogical and efficacy beliefs during a developmental teacher preparation program. Proceedings of the PME-NA 2006. 28th Psychology in Mathematics Education Conference, pp 548–555. Mérida, Mexico: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.

Thompson, A. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127-146). MacMillan.

Thompson, P. W. (1994). Concrete materials and teaching for mathematical understanding. Arithmetic Teacher, 41(9), 556-558.

Tran, T. (2015). Teachers’ beliefs and how those beliefs affect manipulative use in the classroom. [Research paper for Master of Teaching degree, University of Toronto]. University of Toronto Libraries TSpace.

Uribe-Flórez, L. J., & Wilkins, J. L. M. (2010). Elementary school teachers' manipulative use. School Science and Mathematics, 110(7), 363-371.

Uttal, D. H., Scudder, K. V., & DeLoache, J. S. (1997). Manipulatives as symbols: A new perspective on the use of concrete objects to teach mathematics. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18, 37-54.

Vacc, N. N., & Bright, G. W. (1999). Elementary preservice teachers' changing beliefs and instructional use of children's mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 89-110. https//

Valcke, M., Sang, G., Rots, I., & Hermans, R. (2010). Taking prospective teachers’ beliefs into account in teacher education. In P. Peterson, E. Baker & B. McGaw (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (Vol. 7), (pp. 622-628). Elsevier.'_Beliefs_into_Account_in_Teacher_Education

van der Sandt, S. (2007). Research framework on mathematics teacher behaviour: Koehler and Grouws’ framework revisited. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education. 3(4), 343-350.

Wilkins, J. L. M. (2008). The relationship among elementary teachers' content knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 139-164.